Blunt Colon Injury Research Articles

Critical Illness Corticosteroid Insufficiency after Blunt Abdominal Trauma: A Case Report

A 60-year-old man with a history of a previous colon resection presented after a motor vehicle collision. He was hypotensive in the field. A systolic pressure of 58 was noted on admission to the trauma bay. The remaining vital signs revealed a pulse of 99 and respirations 18. The temperature was 98 degrees. The patient was alert with a GCS of 15. He was given 2 liters of crystalloids and his systolic pressure increased to 100. His initial hemoglobin was 12.3 with hematocrit of 37. The initial base deficit was -12 and a venous lactate was 3.3. Work up revealed a left femur fracture, a right tibial plateau fracture and right radius and ulna fractures. An abdominal CT revealed a possible small bowel injury and the patient was taken to the operating room for exploration. The operative findings included small bowel injury and blunt colon injuries requiring jejunal resection and a primary anastomosis along with a segmental colon resection and end-colostomy. The left femur fracture was fixed along with the radius and ulna fractures at a separate operative intervention.

Delayed presentation of an isolated sigmoid Colon injury following blunt abdominal trauma: A case report with review of literature.

Introduction and importanceIsolated Colon injury due to blunt abdominal trauma is very rare. Due to lack of a definitive diagnostic method; it's very challenging to detect such injury and this will lead to delay in treatment and subsequently resulting in high morbidity and mortality. The current literature is relatively sparse concerning the management of blunt colon injuries.Case presentationHere, we report a case of a 17-year-old male patient with isolated sigmoid injury presented 5 days after MVC. He underwent sigmoid resection and end colostomy followed by reversal 6 weeks later. Currently, the patient is disease-free with a completely healed wound.ConclusionThe purpose behind this paper is to raise clinical suspicion regarding delayed presentation of blunt abdominal trauma and it effect on operative decision, so that timely diagnosis and proper management could be carried out. And to discuss the applicability of the defined management algorithm for penetrating colon injury on delay blunts colonic injury.

Contemporary Trends and Outcomes of Blunt Traumatic Colon Injuries Requiring Resection

BackgroundAfter traumatic injury, primary anastomosis after colon resection has overtaken ostomy diversion. Improved technology facilitating primary anastomosis speed and integrity may have driven this change. Trends in ostomy versus anastomosis have yet to be quantified, and recent literature comparing outcomes is incomplete. MethodsThe National Trauma Databank (2007-2014) was queried for all blunt colon injuries requiring resection. Patients were dichotomized into study groups based on whether they underwent ostomy creation. Ostomy creation frequency was compared over time. After subgrouping patients by colon injury location, multivariate regression adjusted for baseline characteristics and evaluated the impact of ostomy on clinical outcomes. ResultsA total of 13,949 colon injuries requiring colectomy were identified. Ostomy frequency did not vary by study year (P = 0.536). Univariate analysis showed that patients undergoing ostomy were older (median, 40 versus 32; P < 0.001) and more often had comorbidities (65% versus 56%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that ostomy creation was significantly associated with lower mortality after sigmoid colon injury (odds ratio, 0.512; P = 0.011) and higher rates of unplanned reoperation after transverse colon injury (odds ratio, 3.135; P = 0.048). Across all colon injuries, ostomies were significantly associated with longer hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, and ventilator days. ConclusionsOstomy creation for colonic injury has reached an equilibrium trough. The impact of ostomy creation varies by not only clinical outcome but also injury location. Further study is needed to define the optimal surgical management for blunt colon injuries requiring resection.

Defining Outcomes after Colon Resection in Blunt Trauma: Is Diversion or Primary Anastomosis More Favorable?

Previous literature demonstrates the safety of primary repair in penetrating colon injury requiring resection, without the creation of a diverting ostomy. It is unknown whether a similar approach can be applied to patients with blunt colon injury. The aim of this study was to measure outcomes in patients who underwent colon resection with and without ostomy creation after blunt trauma injury to help direct future management. Using the National Trauma Data Bank for years 2008 to 2012, we identified patients with blunt trauma mechanisms who underwent colectomy. Patients were stratified into two groups: primary anastomosis and diversion with ostomy. Primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and perioperative complications. All risk-adjusted analyses were performed using logistic regression with consideration of interactions. Five hundred eighty-one observations met our inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar with the exception of age (37.3 vs 42.2 years, P < 0.001) and admission Glasgow coma score (13.2 vs 12.1, P = 0.002). Risk-adjusted mortality for the two groups was not statistically significant (2.3% vs 3.0%, P = 0.63); however, patients with primary anastomosis had a shorter length of stay (18.2 vs 28.1, P < 0.001), fewer days in the intensive care unit (10.9 vs 16.2, P < 0.001), and fewer ventilator days (10.5 vs 14.6, P = 0.01). In patients requiring colon resection after blunt trauma, mortality is not different for those who receive a primary anastomosis versus ostomy. Patients without diversion had shorter hospital stays, intensive care unit days, and ventilator days. These data support that primary anastomosis is safe in this patient population.

Colon Trauma: Evidence-Based Practices.

Colon injury is not uncommon and occurs in about a half of patients with penetrating hollow viscus injuries. Despite major advances in the operative management of penetrating colon wounds, there remains discussion regarding the appropriate treatment of destructive colon injuries, with a significant amount of scientific evidence supporting segmental resection with primary anastomosis in most patients without comorbidities or large transfusion requirement. Although literature is sparse concerning the management of blunt colon injuries, some studies have shown operative decision based on an algorithm originally defined for penetrating wounds should be considered in blunt colon injuries. The optimal management of colonic injuries in patients requiring damage control surgery (DCS) also remains controversial. Studies have recently reported that there is no increased risk compared with patients treated without DCS if fascial closure is completed on the first reoperation, or that a management algorithm for penetrating colon wounds is probably efficacious for colon injuries in the setting of DCS as well.

Applicability of an established management algorithm for colon injuries following blunt trauma

Operative management at our institution for all colon injuries have followed a defined algorithm (ALG) based on risk factors originally identified for penetrating injuries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the applicability of the ALG to blunt colon injuries. Patients with blunt colon injuries during 13 years were identified. As per the ALG, nondestructive (ND) injuries are treated with primary repair. Patients with destructive wounds (serosal tear of ≥50% colon circumference, mesenteric devascularization, and perforations) and concomitant risk factors (transfusion of >6 U packed red blood cells and/or presence of significant comorbidities) are diverted, while patients with no risk factors undergo resection plus anastomosis (RA). Outcomes included suture line failure (SLF), abscess, and mortality. Stratification analysis was performed to determine additional risk factors in the management of blunt colon injuries. A total 151 patients were identified: 76 with destructive injuries and 75 with ND injuries. Of those with destructive injuries, 44 (59%) underwent RA and 29 (39%) underwent diversion. All ND injuries underwent primary repair. Adherence to the ALG was 95%: three patients with destructive injuries underwent primary repair, and five patients with risk factors underwent RA. There were three SLFs (2%) (one involved deviation from the ALG) and eight abscesses (5%). Colon-related mortality was 2.1%. Stratification analysis based on mesenteric involvement, degree of shock, and need for abbreviated laparotomy failed to identify additional risk factors for SLF following RA for blunt colon injuries. Adherence to an ALG, originally defined for penetrating colon injuries, simplified the management of blunt colon injuries. ND injuries should be primarily repaired. For destructive wounds, management based on a defined ALG achieves an acceptably low morbidity and mortality rate. Prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III; therapeutic study, level IV.

The Surgical Option In Blunt Colonic Injuries

Objektive: Because of accompanying coexisting organ injuries, blunt colon injuries may be overlooked at the laparatomy and result in complications. In this study, we aimed to investigate the surgical treatment approaches of blunt injuries and related complications. Methods: The retrospective study included 12 patients who were operated on due to colonic injury associated with blunt trauma between January 2005 and December 2010. Results: The patients comprised 11 (91.7%) males and 1 (8.3%) female, with a mean age of 32.92±13.83 (1768) years. The most common etiological factor was motor vehicle accident. One patient had isolated left colon injury, and the others (91.7%) had one or more accompanying coexisting organ injuries. The most common coexisting injured organ was intestine. Five patients (41.7%) had transverse and left colon injuries and 7 patients had mild fecal contamination. The common surgical method was primary suture, which was applied

Blunt colon injury sustained during a kickboxing match

Emergency physicians routinely evaluate patients for injury from blunt abdominal trauma. Most serious injuries result from high energy mechanisms such as motor vehicle collisions. This case report describes a patient who sustained blunt trauma to the descending colon during a martial arts match, necessitating a hemicolectomy.

Colon and Rectal Injuries

This study was designed to develop treatment algorithms for colon, rectal, and anal injuries based on the review of relevant literature. Information was obtained through a MEDLINE ( www.nobi.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi ) search, and additional references were obtained through cross-referencing key articles cited in these papers. A total of 203 articles were considered relevant. The management of penetrating and blunt colon, rectal, and anal injuries has evolved during the past 150 years. Since the World War II mandate to divert penetrating colon injuries, primary repair or resection and anastomosis have found an increasing role in patients with nondestructive injuries. A critical review of recent literature better defines the role of primary repair and fecal diversion for these injuries and allows for better algorithms for the management of these injuries.

Blunt colon trauma

Blunt colon injury is rare and difficult to diagnose. Delayed diagnosis remains the most threatening presentation of this injury and results in the highest complication rates. Management has evolved over several decades from mandatory colostomy to repair, resection with anastomosis, or selective colostomy in highly destructive injuries.

Independent Predictors of Morbidity and Mortality in Blunt Colon Trauma

We sought to determine the impact of (1) grade of the colon injury, (2) the formation of an ostomy, and (3) associated injuries on outcomes such as morbidity and mortality after blunt colon injuries. We retrospectively reviewed 16,814 cases of blunt abdominal trauma. Patients with colonic injuries were selected and charts reviewed for demographic, clinical, and outcomes data. Injuries were grouped by the Colon Injury Scale (grades I-V). Independent risk factors of morbidity included spine and lung injuries, as well as increased age. A higher grade of colon injury trended toward a significant association with intra-abdominal complications. Independent risk factors of mortality included liver, heart, and lung injuries, as well as intracerebral blood and female gender. The grade of colon injury, the formation of an ostomy, and management of the colon trauma did not independently predict increased intra-abdominal complications, morbidity, or mortality. These results indicate that patients afflicted with blunt colon trauma experience a high rate of morbidity and mortality from associated injuries and or increased age. Treatment regimens directed at these factors will be most helpful in reducing the high morbidity and mortality after blunt colon trauma. Factors such as ostomy formation and management strategy are not associated with increased morbidity or mortality after blunt colon trauma.

Complications of primary repair of colon injury: literature review of 2,964 cases

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of primary repair of colon injuries. Materials and methods: A literature review was made of 35 publications containing 5,400 colon injuries in retrospective and prospective studies. Results: There were 62 (2.4%) failures in 2,627 primary repairs based on surgeon discretion or absence of risk factors. In prospective series of 337 patients repaired without exclusionary criteria, there were 4 (1.2%) suture line failures ( P = not significant). In prospective randomized trials without exclusionary criteria, 127 primary repairs had less morbidity compared with 109 diverted patients ( P <0.02). The leak rate after resection and anastomosis (5.5%) is greater than after simple suture of perforation (1.4%; P <0.001). The 66 colon repair leaks were treated by conversion to colostomy or led to fistulae that usually healed spontaneously. A preponderance of failed repairs occurred in the setting of multiple injuries or comorbid conditions. Conclusions: Penetrating and blunt colon injuries in civilian practice are safely managed by primary repair, but colostomy may still be advised in selected cases.

Canadian attitudes toward use of primary repair in management of colon trauma

The majority of recent American articles on management of colon trauma promote liberal use of primary repair. The extent to which Canadian surgeons have embraced such recommendations is unknown. To determine the current attitude of Canadian surgeons toward the use of primary repair, we surveyed the members of The Canadian Association of General Surgeons regarding their management of three fictitious cases of penetrating and blunt colon trauma. Three hundred seventeen members of the Canadian Association of General Surgeons responded. Ninety-two percent managed a fictitious case of early, uncontaminated stab wounds by primary repair. Delay in treatment or fecal contamination was associated with a significantly reduced number of respondents choosing primary repair (P < 0.001). Surgeons were less likely to choose primary repair for management of a case of blunt colon injury (35 percent; P <0.001), and only 25 percent considered primary repair an option for a case of low velocity bullet wounds; 2 percent chose it for high velocity bullet wounds. Overall, the most common response to colon trauma scenarios was colostomy. However, 96 percent of respondents selected primary repair as the treatment of choice for at least one clinical situation depicted in the questionnaire. The likelihood of choosing primary repair was independent of surgeons' experiences or the level of the surgeons' trauma center. Although there are still settings in which many Canadian surgeons consider colostomy the appropriate treatment for colon injuries, primary repair has definitely established a foothold in all levels of Canadian general surgery practice.

鈍的外力による上行結腸壁内血腫・後腹膜穿破の１例

The case of a 17-year-old boy with intramural hematoma of the ascending colon due to blunt trauma is presented. Although the characteristic findings of US and CT scan were demonstrated, it was difficult to diagnose the locality of his hematoma. Classifications of blunt colon injury and an interpretation of the injury are presented. The surgical indication and procedures of the injury are discussed.