Menawat S S, Dennis J W, Laneve L M, Frykberg E R
Department of Surgery, University of Florida Health Science Center/Jacksonville 32209.
J Vasc Surg. 1992 Sep;16(3):397-400; discussion 400-1.
The evaluation and management of potential arterial injuries in penetrating neck trauma are controversial. Routine surgical exploration or arteriography can be very expensive and time-consuming and can overburden available resources if used in all patients. We reviewed the records of 4035 patients seen in our trauma center during a 20-month period and identified a total of 110 patients (2.7%) with penetrating wounds to zone II of the neck; 50 were from gunshot wounds, 43 from stab wounds, 7 from shotgun injuries, and 10 from lacerations. In 42 (39%) patients there was no arteriogram or surgery based on location of the wounds or lack of any physical findings. None of these patients later had any evidence of an arterial injury. Forty-five patients (40%) had arteriograms based on proximity or a "soft" sign of vascular injury, which included evidence of significant bleeding or a stable hematoma. A total of 15 injuries to major arteries were identified: 3 common carotid, 5 internal carotid, and 7 vertebral. One patient died during initial resuscitation, and four patients went directly to surgery with no preoperative arteriogram for active bleeding and expanding hematoma (n = 1), an expanding hematoma (n = 2), and a large, stable hematoma (n = 1). Only one patient (of the 110) had a significant major arterial injury requiring surgery that was not predicted by physical findings. Nine arterial injuries were treated nonoperatively: six vertebral, two common carotid intimal flaps, and one small distal internal carotid pseudoaneurysm (diagnosed late). Three additional minor external carotid artery injuries were observed with no adverse sequelae.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
穿透性颈部创伤中潜在动脉损伤的评估与处理存在争议。常规手术探查或动脉造影可能成本高昂且耗时,如果应用于所有患者,会使现有资源不堪重负。我们回顾了在20个月期间于我们创伤中心就诊的4035例患者的记录,共识别出110例(2.7%)颈部Ⅱ区穿透伤患者;50例为枪伤,43例为刺伤,7例为霰弹枪伤,10例为撕裂伤。42例(39%)患者因伤口位置或无任何体格检查发现而未行动脉造影或手术。这些患者后来均无动脉损伤的证据。45例(40%)患者基于血管损伤的临近程度或“软性”体征进行了动脉造影,这些体征包括大量出血或稳定血肿的证据。共识别出15例主要动脉损伤:3例颈总动脉,5例颈内动脉,7例椎动脉。1例患者在初始复苏期间死亡,4例患者因活动性出血和血肿扩大(n = 1)、血肿扩大(n = 2)以及巨大稳定血肿(n = 1)未行术前动脉造影而直接接受手术。110例患者中只有1例有明显的主要动脉损伤需要手术,而体格检查未预测到。9例动脉损伤采用非手术治疗:6例椎动脉损伤,2例颈总动脉内膜瓣损伤,1例颈内动脉远端小假性动脉瘤(诊断较晚)。另外观察到3例颈外动脉 minor 损伤,无不良后遗症。(摘要截短至250字)