Suppr超能文献

对于穿透性颈部Ⅱ区创伤中的血管损伤评估,仅体格检查就安全且准确。

Physical examination alone is safe and accurate for evaluation of vascular injuries in penetrating Zone II neck trauma.

作者信息

Atteberry L R, Dennis J W, Menawat S S, Frykberg E R

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Florida Health Science Center, Jacksonville 32209.

出版信息

J Am Coll Surg. 1994 Dec;179(6):657-62.

PMID:7952477
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Optimal management of patients with Zone II penetrating neck trauma for vascular injury remains controversial. Retrospective studies have demonstrated that physical examination alone may be as accurate as arteriography in detecting significant cervical vascular injuries requiring operative repair. This study was undertaken to evaluate prospectively the safety and accuracy of physical examination in determining the management of patients with penetrating Zone II neck trauma.

STUDY DESIGN

During a 22 month period, 66 consecutive patients presented to our Level I trauma center with penetrating neck trauma. Determination of the vascular status of these patients was based on physical examination alone if the injury was located in Zone II and there was no definite sign of vascular injury. Patients were observed for at least 23 hours. Patients admitted during the first year of the study underwent ultrasound examination of the carotid artery within 48 hours to assess for injuries.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients met admission criteria. Two patients had large lacerations requiring operative debridement and closure. Six patients underwent arteriography because of the proximity of the vertebral arteries to the injury tract, the trajectory also included Zone I or III, or there were equivocal signs of vascular injury. Each arteriogram was negative. Of the remaining 28 patients, none had any evidence of a vascular injury during hospitalization or follow-up period (mean of 1.8 months). Eighteen of the 28 patients had carotid ultrasounds, none of which showed injuries requiring operative intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with Zone II penetrating neck injuries and no definite signs of vascular injury can be safely and accurately managed on the basis of physical examination alone. Arteriography or ultrasonography are not needed to identify vascular injuries.

摘要

背景

对于Ⅱ区穿透性颈部创伤患者血管损伤的最佳处理仍存在争议。回顾性研究表明,在检测需要手术修复的严重颈部血管损伤方面,仅体格检查可能与动脉造影一样准确。本研究旨在前瞻性评估体格检查在确定Ⅱ区穿透性颈部创伤患者处理方案时的安全性和准确性。

研究设计

在22个月期间,66例连续的穿透性颈部创伤患者被送至我们的一级创伤中心。如果损伤位于Ⅱ区且没有明确的血管损伤迹象,则仅根据体格检查来确定这些患者的血管状况。对患者进行至少23小时的观察。在研究的第一年入院的患者在48小时内接受颈动脉超声检查以评估损伤情况。

结果

36例患者符合入院标准。2例患者有大的裂伤,需要进行手术清创和缝合。6例患者因椎动脉靠近损伤通道、损伤轨迹还包括Ⅰ区或Ⅲ区或有血管损伤的可疑迹象而接受动脉造影。每次动脉造影结果均为阴性。在其余28例患者中,住院期间或随访期间(平均1.8个月)均无血管损伤的证据。28例患者中有18例进行了颈动脉超声检查,均未显示需要手术干预的损伤。

结论

对于Ⅱ区穿透性颈部损伤且无明确血管损伤迹象的患者,仅根据体格检查即可安全、准确地进行处理。无需动脉造影或超声检查来识别血管损伤。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验