Department of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore.
Singapore Med J. 2009 Dec;50(12):1150-3.
Diagnosis of diaphragmatic rupture is difficult, and delays could result in a catastrophic outcome. We reviewed our institution's management of patients with diaphragmatic rupture after blunt trauma.
All patients in this study were treated at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, from March 2002 to October 2008. Patients with penetrating injuries were excluded. The parameters included age, mechanism of injury, haemodynamic status at admission, Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score, injury severity score (ISS), imaging studies, location of diaphragmatic injuries, associated injuries and outcome.
14 patients with a median age of 38 years formed the study group. Vehicular-related incidents accounted for 71.4 percent of the injuries. The median GCS score on admission was 14 (range 3-15), while the median systolic blood pressure and heart rate were 94 (range 50-164) mmHg and 110 (range 76-140) beats per minute, respectively. The median ISS was 41 (range 14-66). All had chest radiographs performed in the emergency department, six (42.9 percent) had computed tomography performed before surgery, while the remaining eight (57.1 percent) were sent straight to the operating theatre from the emergency department. There were five (35.7 percent) right-sided and nine (64.3 percent) left-sided diaphragmatic ruptures. The mortality rate was 35.7 percent. Some of the associated injuries included eight (57.1 percent) splenic lacerations, five (35.7 percent) haemothorax and lung injuries, four (28.6 percent) bone fractures and three (21.4 percent) liver lacerations. 12 (85.7 percent) patients underwent repair of the diaphragmatic rupture using interrupted polypropylene suture, while the remaining two (14.3 percent) were too haemodynamically unstable to undergo definitive treatment. Advanced age, haemodynamic instability and raised ISS were associated with mortality.
An accurate diagnosis of diaphragmatic rupture in trauma patients is difficult, and a thorough examination of both the hemidiaphragms is mandatory during emergency laparotomy for these patients. Those with more severe injuries and decreased physiological reserves usually fare worse.
膈破裂的诊断较为困难,若延误诊断可能导致灾难性后果。我们回顾了本机构在钝性创伤后对膈破裂患者的治疗方法。
本研究中的所有患者均于 2002 年 3 月至 2008 年 10 月在新加坡陈笃生医院接受治疗,排除了穿透性损伤患者。纳入的参数包括年龄、损伤机制、入院时的血流动力学状态、格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS)、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、影像学研究、膈损伤部位、合并伤和结局。
14 名中位年龄为 38 岁的患者构成了研究组。机动车相关事故占损伤原因的 71.4%。入院时的中位 GCS 评分为 14 分(范围 3-15 分),中位收缩压和心率分别为 94mmHg(范围 50-164mmHg)和 110 次/分(范围 76-140 次/分)。ISS 的中位值为 41 分(范围 14-66 分)。所有患者均在急诊科进行了胸部 X 线检查,6 名(42.9%)患者在术前进行了 CT 检查,而其余 8 名(57.1%)则直接从急诊科送入手术室。有 5 名(35.7%)右侧和 9 名(64.3%)左侧膈破裂。死亡率为 35.7%。一些合并伤包括 8 名(57.1%)脾裂伤、5 名(35.7%)血胸和肺损伤、4 名(28.6%)骨折和 3 名(21.4%)肝裂伤。12 名(85.7%)患者使用间断聚丙烯缝线修复膈破裂,其余 2 名(14.3%)因血流动力学不稳定而无法进行确定性治疗。高龄、血流动力学不稳定和 ISS 升高与死亡率相关。
创伤患者膈破裂的准确诊断较为困难,对这些患者进行急诊剖腹探查时必须彻底检查双侧膈肌。那些合并更严重损伤和生理储备减少的患者通常预后较差。