Diagnostic Accuracy of Computed Tomography for the Prediction of the Need for Laparotomy for Traumatic Hollow Viscus Injury: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Traumatic hollow viscus injury (THVI) is one of the most difficult challenges in the trauma setting. Computed tomography (CT) is the most common modality used to diagnose THVI; however, various performance outcomes of CT have been reported. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze how precise and reliable CT is as a tool for the assessment of THVI. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on studies on the use of CT to diagnose THVI. Publications were retrieved by performing structured searches in databases, review articles and major textbooks. For the statistical analysis, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were constructed using hierarchical models. Results: Sixteen studies enrolling 12,514 patients were eligible for the final analysis. The summary sensitivity and specificity of CT for the diagnosis of THVI were 0.678 (95% CI: 0.501–0.809) and 0.969 (95% CI: 0.920–0.989), respectively. The summary false positive rate was 0.031 (95% CI 0.011–0.071). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, we found that CT had indeterminate sensitivity and excellent specificity for the diagnosis of THVI.

Injuries to the Stomach, Small Bowel, Colon, and Rectum

Hollow viscus injury is most often the consequence of penetrating abdominal trauma. As a result of blunt force trauma, bowel injury occurs with relative infrequency: in one multi-institutional analysis, only 1.2% of blunt trauma admissions had an associated hollow viscus injury. The diagnosis of hollow viscus injury remains a challenge in abdominal trauma patients, and subsequent evaluation is determined by the mechanism of injury. Regardless of the specific injury mechanism, however, the principles and techniques of operative management are largely the same. This review covers determination of need for operation, and operative management. Figures show algorithms outlining the evaluation of blunt hollow organ injury in a hemodynamically stable patient with an unreliable physical examination, the treatment of truncal stab wounds, the treatment of blunt bowel and mesenteric injury, the treatment of gastric injury, the treatment of small bowel injury, the treatment of colon injury, the treatment of rectosigmoid or rectal injury, and a demonstration of presacral drainage through a curved incision midway between the anus and the tip of the coccyx. Tables list the incidence of findings suggestive of blunt mesenteric and bowel injury in true positive and false positive computed tomography scans, and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma organ injury scales for gastrointestinal tract and pancreas. This review contains 8 figures, 3 tables, and 58 references Keywords: Injury, blunt, primary rectal repair, colostomy, laparotomy, trauma

Diagnostic performance of CT and the use of GI contrast material for detection of hollow viscus injury after penetrating abdominal trauma. Experience from a level 1 Nordic trauma center

Background Use of gastrointestinal (GI) contrast material for computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of hollow viscus injury (HVI) after penetrating abdominal trauma is still controversial. Purpose To assess the sensitivity of CT and GI contrast material use in detecting HVI after penetrating abdominal trauma. Material and Methods Retrospective analysis (2013–2016) of patients with penetrating abdominal trauma. Data from the local trauma registry, medical records, and imaging from PACS were reviewed. CT and surgical findings were compared. Results Of 636 patients with penetrating trauma, 177 (163 men, 14 women) had abdominal trauma (mean age 34 years, age range 16–88 years): 155/177 (85%) were imaged with CT on arrival; 128/155 (83%) were stab wounds and 21/155 (14%) were gunshot wounds; 47/155 (30%) had emergent surgery after CT. Two patients were imaged using oral, rectal and i.v. contrast; 23 with rectal and i.v. contrast; and 22 with i.v. contrast only. Surgery revealed HVI in 26 patients. CT had an overall sensitivity 69.2%, specificity 90.5%, PPV 90.0%, and NPV 70.4%. CT with oral and/or rectal contrast (n = 25) had sensitivity 66.7%, specificity 71.4%, PPV 85.7%, and NPV 45.5%. CT with i.v. contrast only (n = 22) had 75% sensitivity, 100% specificity, PPV 100%, and NPV 87.5%. No statistically significant difference was found between sensitivity of CT with GI contrast material and i.v. contrast only ( P = 1). Conclusion Stab wounds were the most common cause of penetrating abdominal trauma. CT had 69.2% sensitivity and 90.5% specificity in detecting HVI. CT with GI contrast had similar sensitivity as CT with i.v. contrast only.

Isolated free fluid on computed tomography for blunt abdominal trauma

Introduction The clinical significance of isolated free fluid on abdominal computed tomography (CT) in patients with blunt abdominal trauma is unclear. This audit reviews our unit’s experience with isolated free fluid and attempts to refine our clinical algorithms for the assessment of patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Materials and methods All patients who sustained blunt abdominal trauma between December 2012 and December 2017 who were subjected to multidetector CT of the abdomen as part of their initial investigation were included in this study. Results During the five-year period under review, a total of 1066 patients underwent abdominal CT following blunt poly trauma. A total of 84 (7.9%) patients died. There were 148 (14%) patients with CT finding of isolated free fluid. Of these, 128 (67%) were selected for non-operative management, which included a period of serial abdominal examinations. In this non-operative group, five patients failed their abdominal observations and underwent laparotomy. Findings in these five cases were negative (1), non-therapeutic (1), splenic injury (1), Pancreatic and splenic injury (1) and bladder injury (1). Thirteen patients (10%) died, none of whom had surgery. The causes of death were exsanguination from a major traumatic lower limb injury (1), multiple organ failure (1), traumatic brain injury (10) and spinal cord injury (1). The remaining 20 patients underwent laparotomy. The indications were failed non-operative management (5), abdominal distension (1) and suspicion of a missed hollow viscus injury (14). In this group there were 11 therapeutic and 6 non-therapeutic surgeries and three negative laparotomies. For the 15 patients selected for operative management, the findings were as follows: hollow viscus injury (3), mesenteric bleeds (2), splenic and pancreatic injury (1), liver and bladder injury (1), splenic and bladder injury (1), non-therapeutic (4), negative (3). The finding of isolated free fluid on CT is 98% sensitive and 96% specific for true isolated free fluid (chi square 331.598; P = 0.000). This finding predicts successful non-operative management with a positive predictive value of 93% and a negative predictive value of 96%. Discussion In patients with blunt abdominal trauma, the finding of isolated free fluid on abdominal CT alone is no longer an indication for laparotomy. Other clinical factors must be taken into account when deciding on the need for laparotomy, such as haemodynamic status, clinical abdominal findings and the ability to reliably assess the abdomen. In the absence of a clinical indication for urgent laparotomy, patients with isolated free fluid may be observed.