Blunt Diaphragmatic Injury Research Articles

The edemiological state of blunt diaphragmatic injury: An analysis of a nationwide trauma registry in Japan

BackgroundLittle is known about blunt traumatic diaphragmatic injury (BTDI). This study aimed to investigate the epidemiological state of BTDI, using a nationwide trauma registry in Japan. MethodsData of patients aged ≥18 years who experienced blunt injury between January 2004 and May 2019 were extracted from the Japan Trauma Data Bank. Demographics, cause of trauma, mechanism of injury, physiological parameters, organ injuries, and bone fractures were compared between patients with and those without BTDI. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with BTDI. ResultsA total of 305,141 patients from 244 hospitals were analyzed. The median patient age (interquartile range) was 65 (44–79) years, and 185,750 (60.9%) were men. BTDI was diagnosed in 868 patients (0.3%). The prevalence of BTDI was stable, between 0.2 and 0.6%, over the study period. Among the 868 patients with BTDI, 408 (47.0%) fatalities were recorded. Mortality rates in each year were 42.5–68.2%, with no significant trend toward an improved outcome (P = 0.925). Our multivariable logistic regression analysis found that mechanism of injury, Glasgow Coma Scale score (9–12 or 3–8) on hospital arrival, hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg) on hospital arrival, organ injuries (lung, heart, spleen, bladder, kidney, pancreas, stomach, and liver), and bone fractures (rib, pelvis, lumbar spine, and upper extremities) were independently associated with BTDI. ConclusionUsing a nationwide trauma registry, this study revealed the epidemiological state of BTDI in Japan. BTDI was found to be a very rare but devastating injury, with high in-hospital mortality. Some clinical factors, such as mechanism of injury, Glasgow Coma Scale score, organ injuries, and bone fractures, were independently associated with BTDI.

Non-Operative Management in Crural Hematoma after Blunt Diaphragmatic Injury: A Case Report

Non-Operative Management in Crural Hematoma after Blunt Diaphragmatic Injury: A Case Report

Surgical Management of Sudden Intrathoracic Hemorrhage in Two Patients with Occult Diaphragmatic Injury and Rib Fracture

Background: A sudden massive hemothorax as the initial manifestation of delayed diagnosis of blunt occult diaphragmatic injuries is extremely rare. We report our experience with two cases of sudden massive thoracic hemorrhage treated surgically for occult blunt diaphragm injury. In the present study, we aimed to present the successful rescue of two cases of sudden massive thoracic hemorrhage due to occult blunt diaphragmatic injury during hospitalization by surgical treatment. Sudden massive hemothorax a few days after hospitalization as an initial manifestation of blunt mysterious diaphragm injury is extremely rare.

Laparoscopic repair and total gastrectomy for delayed traumatic diaphragmatic hernia complicated by intrathoracic gastric perforation with tension empyema: a case report

BackgroundBlunt traumatic diaphragmatic hernia (TDH) is a complication of blunt diaphragmatic injury. If missed, it could lead to critical presentations, such as incarceration or strangulation of the herniated intra-abdominal organs, and thus, early surgical repair is required. Methods of the operative approach against delayed TDH remain unclear. Even with the spread of the minimally invasive approach, laparotomy has been predominantly selected for cases with hemodynamic or gastrointestinal complaints. Literature on the use of laparoscopy for repair of such cases is limited, and no study has been conducted for those with intrathoracic gastric perforation.Case presentationA 55-year-old male patient with a history of multiple traumas presented with shock, followed by left hypochondrium pain and vomiting. The patient was admitted to the emergency department of our institution and diagnosed with delayed TDH complicated by intrathoracic gastric perforation, and tension empyema. Emergency surgery using laparoscopic approach was performed, despite unstable hemodynamics, considering orientation, exposure, and operativity compared with laparotomy. Repair of the diaphragm plus total gastrectomy was successfully performed by minimally invasive management. The patient made an uneventful recovery without recurrence after 8 months.ConclusionUnstable hemodynamic conditions and intrathoracic gastric perforation could not be contraindications to laparoscopic repair in treating delayed TDH.

Traumatic Diaphragmatic Lesions - Considerations Over a Series of 15 Consecutive Cases.

Introduction: Diaphragmatic injuries are produced by blunt or penetrating thoracoabdominal trauma. They are potentially life-threatening due to the herniation of abdominal organs into the pleural cavities and severe associated lesions. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyse the clinical presentation and management of patients admitted with diaphragmatic rupture in our institution. Material and Method: We performed a 5-year retrospective study of patients admitted with acute blunt or penetrating diaphragmatic rupture in the Department of General Surgery of "Bagdasar- Arseni" Emergency Hospital. We have studied sex, age, mechanism of trauma, side-location, timeto-diagnosis, concomitant injuries, surgical treatment and outcome. Results: Fifteen patients (8 males, 7 females, mean age: 42 years) with diaphragmatic rupture (left-side: 13, right-side: 2) following blunt (8 patients) or penetrating (7) trauma were included. Patients with blunt diaphragmatic injury had larger tears and abdominal viscera herniation was observed in 6of these cases. A direct suture was performed for all 15 patients. Laparotomy was the surgical approach preferred in most of the cases. Mortality rate was 20%, mainly caused by severe associated lesions. Conclusion: Although traumatic diaphragmatic lesions are frequently associated with severe cerebral and thoraco-abdominal trauma that is also the main cause of death, a prompt diagnosis and treatment can lead to good outcome.

Relevance of early CT scan diagnosis of blunt diaphragmatic injury: A retrospective analysis from the Northern French Alps Emergency Network

Diaphragmatic rupture following blunt trauma occurs rarely. Classically described after high-velocity accidents, ruptures are often associated with multiple organ injuries. The diagnosis is sometimes difficult. The goal of this study was to analyze and to discuss the modalities of early radiologic diagnosis and management of these injuries. This multicenter retrospective study included patients seen between 2009 and 2017 within the Northern Alpine Emergency Network [REseau Nord Alpin des Urgences (RENAU)]. Clinical, radiologic and surgical data from all patients sustaining blunt diaphragmatic rupture were studied. Thirty-one patients (18 men and 13 women), median age 44, were included. The principle mechanism of injury was road or traffic accidents for 22 patients. Diaphragmatic rupture occurred on the left side in 23 patients. Diagnosis was delayed in two patients, at 11 days and three months after the initial accident. Chest X-rays were diagnostic in 18 of 29 patients. CT scan was the reference investigation since it was performed in all patients and confirmed the diagnosis in 26 instances. Repair was surgical via a midline laparotomy in 27 patients, via laparoscopy in three, and via thoracoscopy in one. Three patients died. At urgent surgical exploration in the unstable blunt trauma patient, the surgeon should keep in mind the relatively poor diagnostic performance of chest X-rays. Accurate diagnosis relies on routine inspection of the diaphragmatic cupolas. In the stable trauma victim, contrast-enhanced abdomino-thoracic CT with reconstruction can lead to early diagnosis, which allows for repair under optimal conditions, whether by laparotomy, laparoscopy or thoracoscopy, according to local conditions and expertise.

Blunt traumatic diaphragmatic hernia: Pictorial review of CT signs.

Blunt diaphragmatic rupture rarely accounts for immediate mortality and may go clinically silent until complications occur which can be life threatening. Although many imaging techniques have proven useful for the diagnosis of blunt diaphragmatic rupture, multidetector CT (MDCT) is considered to be the reference standard for the diagnosis of diaphragmatic injury. Numerous CT signs indicating blunt diaphragmatic rupture have been described in literature with variable significance. Accurate diagnosis depends upon the analysis of all the signs rather than a single sign; however, the presence of blunt diaphragmatic rupture should be considered in the presence of any of the described signs. We present a pictorial review of various CT signs used to diagnose blunt diaphragmatic injury. Multiplanar reconstruction is very useful; however, predominantly axial sections have been described in this pictorial review as the images shown are from dual-slice CT.

Isolated right diaphragmatic rupture following blunt trauma

Blunt diaphragmatic injuries are usually caused by blunt trauma or penetrating injuries. The diagnosis may be delayed or missed because of the confusing clinical and radiographic findings and the presence of multiple associated injuries. We report the case of an isolated right diaphragm rupture in a 56-year-old man who sustained blunt thoracic trauma after car accident 2 weeks before presentation. No other injuries were detected, and he was subjected to laparotomy. Diaphragmatic rupture is perceived as an emergency entity. The late appearance of such an injury, without other accompanying injuries, is rare and should be in mind by clinicians treating trauma patients who have a delayed presentation after the injury.

Treating traumatic injuries of the diaphragm

Traumatic diaphragmatic injury (DI) is a unique clinical entity that is usually occult and can easily be missed. Their delayed presentation can be due to the delayed rupture of the diaphragm or delayed detection of diaphragmatic rupture, making the accurate diagnosis of DI challenging to the trauma surgeons. An emergency laparotomy and thorough exploration followed by the repair of the defect is the gold standard for the management of these cases. We report a case of blunt DI in an elderly gentleman and present a comprehensive overview for the management of traumatic injuries of the diaphragm.

Computed tomography without oral contrast solution for blunt diaphragmatic injuries in abdominal trauma

Objective The aim of this study was to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of computed tomography (CT) without oral contrast for diaphragm injuries (DIs) in blunt abdominal trauma. Methods We prospectively enrolled 500 consecutive “trauma-one” patients who received CT imaging and interpretation (CT-Read1) of the abdomen within 45 minutes of their arrival from July 2000 to December 2001. All patients were imaged without oral contrast but with intravenous contrast. Computed tomographic images were reviewed within 24 hours of admission by research radiologists (CT-Read2) blinded to CT-Read1. True DIs were determined hierarchically by either laparotomy or autopsy. Results There were 9 patients with laparotomy or autopsy-proven blunt DIs; 8 of these injuries involved the left hemidiaphragm. The CT-Read1 correctly detected only 6 of 9 blunt DIs, thus missing 3 DIs. One of these involved the right hemidiaphragm, whereas the other 2 were left sided. There were no false-positive findings with CT-Read1 for blunt DI. The sensitivity and specificity of CT imaging with respect to DI were 66.7% (95% CI, 29.9%-92.5%) and 100% (95% CI, 99.2%-100%), respectively. The PPV for the test was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.65-1.00). Conclusion Although the low number of blunt DIs in this study limits its general applicability, CT imaging of the diaphragm without oral contrast appears to perform within the range of reported imaging techniques using oral contrast. Still, CT scanning appears to have an unsatisfactorily low sensitivity to be reliably used in eliminating the diagnosis of blunt DI.

Delayed Discovery of Diaphragmatic Injury After Blunt Trauma: Report of Three Cases

Blunt diaphragmatic injury is an increasingly common occurrence, frequently associated with considerable comorbidity. This injury is often missed at the time of the initial event, but may present some time later. We report three cases of diaphragmatic injury diagnosed 3 weeks, 6 months, and 12 years after the original diaphragmatic injury, respectively. Two of the injuries resulted from side-impact road traffic accidents and one followed a fall from a height. Gastrointestinal obstruction and respiratory compromise were the major presenting symptoms. All three patients were managed with a thoracotomy and the defect was closed without the need for prosthetic mesh. They all recovered uneventfully and have remained well since.

Blunt diaphragmatic injury in a 7-year-old girl

Blunt diaphragmatic injury is notoriously difficult to diagnose. There is no gold standard for radiologic diagnosis of this disease entity. This article reports a case of traumatic diaphragmatic rupture in a 7-year-old girl whose injury was identified on hospital day 2. The discussion includes a review of the physiology of this injury and the utility of radiologic modalities in making a timely diagnosis.

Diaphragmatic injuries.

(1) To determine the actual incidence rate of blunt and penetrating diaphragmatic injuries (DI); (2) to evaluate the effectiveness of urgent surgical intervention for treatment of DI; and (3) to reveal main causes of postoperative complications. We reviewed: (1) forensic medical examination charts of 3353 subjects, who died due to polytrauma (including injuries to the chest and/or abdomen) at accident sites; and (2) medical case reports of 4857 patients, treated for thoracoabdominal trauma (TAT) from 1962 to 1998. A detailed analysis was completed with 12 years (1987--1998) of clinical experience, involving 65 (43 penetrating, and 22 blunt) cases of DI. According to forensic medical data, blunt and penetrating DI occurred in 3.7% and 2.6% of individual cases, respectively. Among patients suffering from TAT, it was revealed that blunt DI had occurred in 1.1%, and penetrating in 3.9% of the cases. This data indicates if all the victims, who had sustained TAT, had survived, the incidence rate of DI would have been 2.6% (blunt -- 2.1%, and penetrating -- 3.4%). All the patients, provided surgical operations due to DI, survived. Morbidity in patients, suffering from blunt and penetrating DI, was 50%, and 35%, respectively. In the group of patients, suffering from penetrating DI, shock, intrapleural and/or intraabdominal haemorrhage, and liver injuries constituted a significant (P<0.05) influence, relevant to development of postoperative complications. The risk of complications was significantly (P<0.05) greater in cases of gunshot injuries. Fractures of chest bones, injuries of abdominal organs, and intraabdominal haemorrhage constituted a significant influence (P<0.05), relevant to development of complications after blunt DI. (1) The danger to the health or even life of patients is not directly caused by DI, but by consequential complications and associated injuries; (2) the effectiveness of treatment is determined by purposeful surgical diagnostics with particular regard to DI and urgent surgical intervention.

Pitfalls in the diagnosis of blunt diaphragmatic injury: Guth AA, Pachter HL, Kim V. American Journal of Surgery. 1995; 170:5–9

Pitfalls in the diagnosis of blunt diaphragmatic injury: Guth AA, Pachter HL, Kim V. American Journal of Surgery. 1995; 170:5–9

Pitfalls in the diagnosis of blunt diaphragmatic injury

Background: Severe blunt trauma to the torso can result in diaphragmatic disruption. Prompt recognition of this potentially life-threatening injury is difficult when the initial chest roentgenogram is unrevealing and immediate thoracotomy or celiotomy is not performed. This retrospective study was undertaken to: (1) determine the incidence of missed diaphragmatic injuries on initial evaluation; (2) identify factors contributing to diagnostic delays; and (3) formulate a diagnostic approach that reliably detects diaphragmatic rupture following blunt trauma. Methods: Retrospective review of hospital records and radiographs from our 18-year experience with blunt diaphragmatic injuries. Results: Seven of 57 (12%) blunt diaphragmatic injuries were missed on initial evaluation. Recognition followed 2 days to 3 months later. Two (4%) isolated left-sided injuries initially presented with normal chest roentgenograms. Five patients (9%) (4 with right-sided ruptures) had abnormalities on chest roentgenogram or computed tomography (CT) initially attributed to chest trauma. They were diagnosed by radionuclide, ultrasound, or CT investigations of hemothorax, pulmonary sepsis, and right upper quadrant pain; and, in 1 case, at thoracotomy for a persistent right hemothorax. In the remaining 50 patients (88%), the diagnosis was established within 24 hours. In 21 (42%) of these, the problem was initially recognized at the time of celiotomy for accompanying injuries. Conclusions: Blunt diaphragmatic injuries are easily missed in the absence of other indications for immediate surgery, since radiologic abnormalities of the diaphragm—particularly those involving the right hemidiaphragm—are often interpreted as thoracic trauma. In this setting, a high index of suspicion coupled with selective use of radionuclide scanning, ultrasound, and CT or magnetic resonance imaging is necessary for early detection of this uncommon injury.

Management of penetrating and blunt diaphragmatic injury.

The past 5 years' experience with diaphragmatic injuries at the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio was reviewed to refine the clinical signs and appropriate treatment. During this period 102 patients were treated. Ninety-three patients incurred penetrating trauma to the diaphragm and nine patients suffered blunt trauma. Chest X-rays were normal in 40 patients, a hemo- and/or pneumothorax was present in 57, herniated abdominal viscera in four, and free air in one. Peritoneal lavage was positive in six of seven patients with blunt diaphragmatic injury, but was falsely negative in two of five patients (20%) with penetrating diaphragmatic injury. Eighty-nine patients (87%) experienced 137 associated injuries (excluding hemo- and/or pneumothorax). Nine patients (8.8%) had an isolated diaphragmatic injury. Four patients (4%) had a diaphragmatic injury associated with only a hemo- and/or pneumothorax. All patients, except for three with injuries recognized late, were operated upon immediately. Two patients had a missed diaphragmatic injury at initial laparotomy. There was one death in the series from a consumption coagulopathy. It was concluded that injuries to the diaphragm should be suspected in all patients with severe blunt torso trauma or with penetrating injuries near the diaphragm. Because of the nonspecificity of X-rays and the 20% false negative rate for peritoneal lavage, we believe that missed injuries and morbidity can be minimized by immediate laparotomy for all patients with abdominal and low thoracic penetrating injuries. Care must be taken not to overlook associated injuries.