Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Fundación Valle del Lili, Cra 98 No. 18 - 49, Cali, 760032, Colombia.
Sección de Cirugía de Trauma Y Emergencias, Universidad del Valle - Hospital Universitario del Valle, Cali, Colombia.
World J Surg. 2021 Apr;45(4):1043-1052. doi: 10.1007/s00268-020-05854-y. Epub 2020 Nov 5.
Damage control surgery (DCS) has emerged as a new option in the management of non-traumatic peritonitis patients to increase survival in critically ill patients. The purpose of this study was to compare DCS with conventional strategy (anastomosis/ostomies in the index laparotomy) for severe non-traumatic peritonitis regarding postoperative complications, ostomy rate, and mortality and to propose a useful algorithm in the clinical practice.
Patients who underwent an urgent laparotomy for non-trauma peritonitis at a single level I trauma center in Colombia between January 2003 and December 2018, were retrospectively included. We compared patients who had DCS management versus definitive initial surgical management (DISM) group. We evaluated clinical outcomes and morbidities among groups.
290 patients were included; 81 patients were treated with DCS and 209 patients underwent DISM. Patients treated with DCS had a worse critical status before surgery with higher SOFA score [median, DCS group: 5 (IQR: 3-8) vs. DISM group: 3 (IQR: 1-6), p < 0.001]. The length of hospital stay and overall mortality rate of DCS group were not significant statistical differences with DISM group. Complications rate related to primary anastomosis or primary ostomy was similar. There is not difference in ostomy rate among groups. At multivariate analysis, SOFA > 6 points and APACHE-II > 20 points correlated with a higher probability of DCS.
DCS in severe non-trauma peritonitis patients is feasible and safe as surgical strategy management without increasing mortality, length hospital of stay, or complications. DCS principles might be applied in the non-trauma scenarios without increase the stoma rate.
损伤控制外科(DCS)已成为非创伤性腹膜炎患者治疗的新选择,可提高危重症患者的生存率。本研究旨在比较 DCS 与传统策略(初次剖腹术中的吻合/造口术)治疗严重非创伤性腹膜炎的术后并发症、造口率和死亡率,并提出一种在临床实践中有用的算法。
回顾性纳入 2003 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月在哥伦比亚一级创伤中心接受非创伤性腹膜炎紧急剖腹术的患者。我们比较了接受 DCS 治疗的患者与接受确定性初始手术治疗(DISM)的患者。我们评估了各组的临床结局和并发症。
共纳入 290 例患者,81 例患者接受 DCS 治疗,209 例患者接受 DISM。接受 DCS 治疗的患者术前病情更为严重,SOFA 评分更高[中位数,DCS 组:5(IQR:3-8)比 DISM 组:3(IQR:1-6),p<0.001]。DCS 组的住院时间和总死亡率与 DISM 组无显著统计学差异。与初次吻合或初次造口相关的并发症发生率相似。两组的造口率无差异。多因素分析显示,SOFA>6 分和 APACHE-II>20 分与 DCS 的可能性增加相关。
DCS 作为一种外科治疗策略,在严重非创伤性腹膜炎患者中是可行且安全的,不会增加死亡率、住院时间或并发症。DCS 原则可应用于非创伤性情况下,而不会增加造口率。