Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Department of Surgery, Section of Urology, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
J Urol. 2020 Sep;204(3):538-544. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001075. Epub 2020 Apr 7.
We studied the current management trends for extraperitoneal bladder injuries and evaluated the use of operative repair versus catheter drainage, and the associated complications with each approach.
We prospectively collected data on bladder trauma from 20 level 1 trauma centers across the United States from 2013 to 2018. We excluded patients with intraperitoneal bladder injury and those who died within 24 hours of hospital arrival. We separated patients with extraperitoneal bladder injuries into 2 groups (catheter drainage vs operative repair) based on their initial management within the first 4 days and compared the rates of bladder injury related complications among them. Regression analyses were used to identify potential predictors of complications.
From 323 bladder injuries we included 157 patients with extraperitoneal bladder injuries. Concomitant injuries occurred in 139 (88%) patients with pelvic fracture seen in 79%. Sixty-seven patients (43%) initially underwent operative repair for their extraperitoneal bladder injuries. The 3 most common reasons for operative repair were severity of injury or bladder neck injury (40%), injury found during laparotomy (39%) and concern for pelvic hardware contamination (28%). Significant complications were identified in 23% and 19% of the catheter drainage and operative repair groups, respectively (p=0.55). The only statistically significant predictor for complications was bladder neck or urethral injury (RR 2.69, 95% 1.21-5.97, p=0.01).
In this large multi-institutional cohort, 43% of patients underwent surgical repair for initial management of extraperitoneal bladder injuries. We found no significant difference in complications between the initial management strategies of catheter drainage and operative repair. The most significant predictor for complications was concomitant urethral or bladder neck injury.
我们研究了目前治疗腹膜外膀胱损伤的管理趋势,并评估了手术修复与导管引流的应用,以及每种方法的相关并发症。
我们前瞻性地从美国 20 个 1 级创伤中心收集了 2013 年至 2018 年期间的膀胱创伤数据。我们排除了腹膜内膀胱损伤患者和在入院后 24 小时内死亡的患者。我们根据患者在最初 4 天内的初始治疗,将腹膜外膀胱损伤患者分为两组(导管引流与手术修复),并比较两组患者之间与膀胱损伤相关的并发症发生率。回归分析用于确定并发症的潜在预测因素。
在 323 例膀胱损伤中,我们纳入了 157 例腹膜外膀胱损伤患者。骨盆骨折患者 139 例(88%)合并损伤,其中 79%可见骨盆骨折。67 例(43%)患者最初因腹膜外膀胱损伤接受手术修复。手术修复的主要原因有 40%为损伤严重或膀胱颈部损伤、39%为剖腹探查时发现损伤和 28%为担心骨盆内固定物污染。导管引流组和手术修复组分别有 23%和 19%的患者发生严重并发症(p=0.55)。唯一有统计学意义的并发症预测因素是膀胱颈部或尿道损伤(RR 2.69,95%CI 1.21-5.97,p=0.01)。
在这项大型多机构队列研究中,43%的患者接受了手术修复作为初始治疗腹膜外膀胱损伤的方法。我们发现导管引流和手术修复的初始管理策略之间的并发症无显著差异。并发症的最显著预测因素是并发的尿道或膀胱颈部损伤。