Cornwell E E, Velmahos G C, Berne T V, Murray J A, Chahwan S, Asensio J, Demetriades D
Department of Surgery, Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA.
J Am Coll Surg. 1998 Jul;187(1):58-63. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(98)00111-2.
Some authors have stated that virtually all patients with penetrating colon injuries can be safely managed with primary repair. The purpose of this study is to test the applicability of this statement to all trauma patients by evaluating a protocol of liberal primary repair applied to a group of patients at high risk of septic complications.
We performed a prospective analysis of a liberal policy of primary repair applied to patients at high risk of developing postoperative septic complications admitted to a Level I urban trauma center. Inclusion criteria were full-thickness colon injury and at least one of three additional risk factors: 1) Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Index (PATI) of 25 or more; 2) 6 U or more of blood transfused; and 3) 6 hours or longer elapsed between injury and surgery.
Of 56 patients studied (55 male, 1 female, average age 28.8 years, mean PATI 35.3), the vast majority had gunshot wounds as the mechanism of injury (89%), PATI 25 or more (95%), multiple blood transfusions (77%), an Injury Severity Score greater than 15 (66%), and a need for postoperative ventilatory support in the surgical intensive care unit (61%). Of 56 patients, 49 (88%) had at least one colonic suture line, and 25 patients (45%) had destructive colon injuries requiring resection. Intraabdominal infections occurred in 15 (27%) of 56 patients and colon suture line disruption occurred in 3 (6%) of 49. Two of these patients developed multisystem organ failure, and death was directly related to breakdown of their colonic anastomosis.
On the basis of these data and the relative infrequency of patients in prospective randomized trials with destructive colon injuries, we believe there is still room for consideration of fecal diversion in patients in high-risk categories with destructive colon injuries requiring resection.
一些作者指出,几乎所有穿透性结肠损伤患者都可通过一期修复安全处理。本研究的目的是通过评估一项应用于有脓毒症并发症高风险患者群体的宽松一期修复方案,来检验该论断对所有创伤患者的适用性。
我们对一家一级城市创伤中心收治的有术后脓毒症并发症高风险患者实施的宽松一期修复策略进行了前瞻性分析。纳入标准为全层结肠损伤以及以下三个额外风险因素中的至少一项:1)穿透性腹部创伤指数(PATI)为25或更高;2)输注6单位或更多血液;3)受伤与手术之间间隔6小时或更长时间。
在研究的56例患者中(55例男性,1例女性,平均年龄28.8岁,平均PATI为35.3),绝大多数损伤机制为枪伤(89%),PATI为25或更高(95%),多次输血(77%),损伤严重程度评分大于15(66%),且需要在外科重症监护病房进行术后通气支持(61%)。56例患者中,49例(88%)至少有一处结肠缝合线,25例患者(45%)有需要切除的结肠毁损性损伤。56例患者中有15例(27%)发生腹腔内感染,49例中有3例(6%)发生结肠缝合线破裂。其中2例患者发生多系统器官衰竭,死亡与结肠吻合口破裂直接相关。
基于这些数据以及前瞻性随机试验中结肠毁损性损伤患者相对较少这一情况,我们认为对于有结肠毁损性损伤且需要切除的高风险类别患者,仍有考虑粪便转流的空间。