Asensio J A, Berne J, Demetriades D, Murray J, Gomez H, Falabella A, Fox A, Velmahos G, Shoemaker W, Berne T V
Department of Surgery, University of Southern California, and the Los Angeles County/University of Southern California Medical Center, 90033-4525, USA.
J Trauma. 1997 Aug;43(2):319-24. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199708000-00018.
This study was performed to assess the experience with penetrating esophageal injuries of an urban Level I trauma center and to attempt to correlate the time to establish a diagnosis with outcome including death, surgical intensive care unit length of stay, and esophageal-related complications.
Retrospective study over a 72-month period at a single institution comparing age, admission blood pressure, Revised Trauma Score (RTS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), mechanism and anatomic location of injury, and time interval from admission to the operating room (OR) between nonsurvivors and survivors. Patients who survived to reach the operating room were divided into two groups: those who went immediately to the operating room (no preoperative evaluation) and those who underwent diagnostic studies to identify their injuries (preoperative evaluation). Data analysis was done of the same parameters plus average number of associated injuries, complications, and intensive care unit length of stay. Statistical methods used univariate analysis (Fisher's exact test and Student's t test).
Forty-three patients were identified with penetrating esophageal injuries and had the following characteristics: 36 males (84%) and 7 females (16%); mean RTS, 9.39; mean ISS, 28.1; mean time interval to OR, 9.8 hours. Associated injuries occurred with 42 patients (98%). The overall complication rate was 14 of 32 (44%), and the overall mortality was 11 of 43 (26%). Corrected mortality was 22%. Differences were noted between nonsurvivors and survivors in the following parameters: admission blood pressure < 90, 11 of 11 versus 3 of 29 (p < 0.001); RTS, 2.364 versus 11.406 (p < 0.001); ISS, 45 versus 21 (p < 0.001); time interval from admission to OR, 18.3 minutes versus 9.8 hours (p < 0.05). Thirty-six patients survived to reach the operating room, 18 in the no preoperative evaluation group and 17 in the preoperative evaluation group. No statistically significant differences were noted between these two groups in the following parameters: age, RTS, ISS, admission blood pressure, anatomic location of injury, number of associated injuries, or intensive care unit length of stay. Average length of time to the operating room was 16.7 hours in the preoperative evaluation group and 1.4 hours in the no preoperative evaluation group (p < 0.001). Twelve complications (all esophageal-related) occurred among seven patients in the preoperative evaluation group, and seven complications (five esophageal-related) occurred among seven patients in the no preoperative evaluation group. Because of the small sample size, this failed to reach a statistical difference (p < 0.05).
Esophageal injuries carry a high morbidity and mortality. Although no definite conclusion can be drawn because of the small sample size, there does appear to be an increased morbidity associated with the diagnostic workup and its inherent delay in operative repair of these injuries. For centers practicing selective management of penetrating neck injuries and transmediastinal gunshot wounds, the rapid diagnosis and definitive repair of esophageal injury should be made a high priority.
本研究旨在评估一家城市一级创伤中心处理穿透性食管损伤的经验,并试图将确诊时间与包括死亡、外科重症监护病房住院时间以及食管相关并发症在内的预后情况进行关联分析。
在单一机构进行一项为期72个月的回顾性研究,比较非幸存者和幸存者的年龄、入院时血压、修订创伤评分(RTS)、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、损伤机制和解剖位置,以及从入院到手术室(OR)的时间间隔。存活至进入手术室的患者分为两组:直接进入手术室的患者(无术前评估)和接受诊断性检查以明确损伤情况的患者(术前评估)。对相同参数以及相关损伤的平均数量、并发症和重症监护病房住院时间进行数据分析。统计方法采用单因素分析(Fisher精确检验和Student t检验)。
共确定43例穿透性食管损伤患者,其特征如下:男性36例(84%),女性7例(16%);平均RTS为9.39;平均ISS为28.1;平均至手术室时间间隔为9.8小时。42例患者(98%)伴有其他损伤。总体并发症发生率为32例中的14例(44%),总体死亡率为43例中的11例(26%)。校正死亡率为22%。在以下参数方面,非幸存者和幸存者之间存在差异:入院时血压<90,11例中的11例与29例中的3例(p<0.001);RTS,2.364与11.406(p<0.001);ISS,45与21(p<0.001);从入院到手术室的时间间隔,18.3分钟与9.8小时(p<0.05)。36例患者存活至进入手术室,其中术前评估组18例,无术前评估组17例。在以下参数方面,这两组之间未发现统计学上的显著差异:年龄、RTS、ISS、入院时血压、损伤的解剖位置、相关损伤的数量或重症监护病房住院时间。术前评估组进入手术室的平均时间为16.7小时,无术前评估组为1.4小时(p<0.001)。术前评估组7例患者出现12例并发症(均与食管相关),无术前评估组7例患者出现7例并发症(5例与食管相关)。由于样本量小,这未达到统计学差异(p<0.05)。
食管损伤具有较高的发病率和死亡率。尽管由于样本量小无法得出明确结论,但诊断检查及其在这些损伤手术修复中固有的延迟似乎确实会增加发病率。对于实行穿透性颈部损伤和经纵隔枪伤选择性管理的中心,应将食管损伤的快速诊断和确定性修复作为高度优先事项。