Major Pancreatic Injury Research Articles

Contemporary management of pancreatic trauma in a tertiary hepato-pancreato-biliary centre

Aims: Pancreatic trauma accounts for 0.2- 1% of all trauma-related injuries worldwide. Traditionally, operative management was advocated for major pancreatic injuries. However, advances in interventional radiology and gastroenterology techniques have increased non-operative options. The aim of this study is to evaluate the management of a series of patients presenting with pancreatic injury. Methods: Between 2015 to 2019, patients presenting to a specialist Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) centre, with pancreatic trauma, were identified using hospital databases. Severity of injury was assessed from operative notes and radiological studies. Management and outcomes were recorded from clinical notes. These were compared with American Association for the study of Trauma (AAST) guidelines to evaluate. Results: There were 20 patients with pancreatic trauma admitted from 2015 to 2019. 13 (65%) were male. Median (range) age was 22 (2-65) years. 10 patients were children below 18 years of age. 16 (80%) sustained blunt trauma and 4 (20%) penetrating trauma. There were no AAST Grade 5 injuries. 8 (40%) were Grade 4; 5(25%) were Grade 3 and 7(35%) were Grade 1. Overall, 16 (80%) were managed non-operatively. Of the 4(20%) who had surgery, there were 3 that underwent distal pancreatectomies and 1 pancreatoduodenectomy. 10 (50%) patients had blood or blood product transfusions on admission. Complications were due to infected collections- 9 (45%); upper GI bleed- 3(15%) and hypocalcaemia- 1(5%). There were no deaths. Conclusions: This is a small series but the results demonstrate that a conservative policy of management of pancreatic trauma is associated with acceptable outcomes.

Lessons learned from isolated blunt major pancreatic injury: Surgical experience in one trauma centre

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to present our surgical experience of isolated blunt major pancreatic injury (IBMPI), and to compare its characteristic outcomes with that of multi-organ injury. Materials and methodsFrom 1994–2015, 31 patients with IBMPI and 54 patients with multi-organ injury, who underwent surgery, were retrospectively studied. ResultsOf the 31 patients with IBMPI, 22 were male and 9 were female. The median age was 30 years (interquartile range, 20–38). Twenty-one patients were classified as the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma–Organ Injury Scale Grade III, and 10 patients as Grade IV. Patients with IBMPI had significantly lower shock-at-triage rates, lower injury severity scores, longer injury-to-surgery time, and shorter length of hospital stay than those with multi-organ injury. There were no statistically significant differences in sex, age, trauma mechanism, laboratory data, surgical procedures, and complications between the two groups. Eight patients with IBMPI underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography, and 5 patients with complete major pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption underwent pancreatectomy eventually. The remaining 3 patients had partial MPD injury and two of them received a pancreatic duct stent for the treatment of existing postoperative pancreatic fistula. Spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy (SSDP) was performed in 13 patient with IBMPI, followed by spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (n = 12), peripancreatic drainage (n = 4), and central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (n = 2). The overall complication rates, related to the SSDP, SPDP, peripancreatic drainage, and central pancreatectomy, were 10/13 (77%), 4/12 (33%), 3/4 (75%), and 2/2 (100%), respectively. Three patients died resulting in a 10% mortality rate, and the other 16 patients developed intra-abdominal complications resulting in a 52% morbidity rate. In the subgroup analysis of the 25 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy, SPDP was associated with a shorter injury-to-surgery time than SSDP. ConclusionsPatients with IBMPI have longer injury-to-surgery times, compared to those with multi-organ injury. Of the distal pancreatectomy patients, the time interval from injury to surgery was a significant associated factor in preserving or sacrificing the spleen.

The consequences of major visceral vascular injuries on outcome in patients with pancreatic injuries: a case-matched analysis

Major pancreatic injuries are complex to treat, especially when combined with vascular and other critical organ injuries. This case-matched analysis assessed the influence of associated visceral vascular injuries on outcome in pancreatic injuries. A registered prospective database of 461 consecutive patients with pancreatic injuries was used to identify 68 patients with a Pancreatic Injury combined with a major visceral Vascular Injury (PIVI group) and were matched one-to-one by an independent blinded reviewer using a validated individual matching method to 68 similar Pancreatic Injury patients without a vascular injury (PI group). The two groups were compared using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis and outcome including complication rates, length of hospital stay and 90-day mortality rate was measured. The two groups were well matched according to surgical intervention. Mortality in the PIVI group was 41% (n = 28) compared to 13% (n = 9) in the PI alone group (p = 0.000, OR 4.5, CI 1.00-10.5). On univariate analysis the PIVI group was significantly more likely to (i) be shocked on admission, (ii) have a RTS < 7.8, (iii) require damage control laparotomy, (iv) require a blood transfusion, both in frequency and volume, (v) develop a major postoperative complication and (vi) die. On multivariate analysis, the need for damage control laparotomy was a significant variable (p = 0.015, OR 7.95, CI 1.50-42.0) for mortality. Mortality of AAST grade 1 and 2 pancreatic injuries combined with a vascular injury was 18.5% (5/27) compared to an increased mortality of 56.1% (23/41) of AAST grade 3, 4 and 5 pancreatic injuries with vascular injuries (p = 0.0026). This study confirms that pancreatic injuries associated with major visceral vascular injuries have a significantly higher complication and mortality rate than pancreatic injuries without vascular injuries and that the addition of a vascular injury with an increasing AAST grade of pancreatic injury exponentially compounds the mortality rate.

Spleen-preserving versus spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy in adults with blunt major pancreatic injury.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to analyse outcomes of spleen‐preserving (SPDP) and spleen‐sacrificing (SSDP) distal pancreatectomy in adults with severe blunt pancreatic injuries.MethodsThis was an observational study of adult patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for grade III or IV blunt pancreatic injury between 1991 and 2015. Outcomes of SPDP and SSDP were compared.ResultsFifty‐one patients were included, of whom 23 underwent SPDP and 28 SSDP. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 13·0 (i.q.r. 9·0–18·0). No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding sex, trauma mechanism, shock at triage, laboratory data, location, ISS, associated injury, length of stay, mortality or morbidity. Age (27·0 versus 36·5 years; P = 0·012) and time interval from injury to distal pancreatectomy (15·0 versus 44·0 h; P = 0·022) differed significantly between SPDP and SSDP groups respectively. The mortality rate was 4 per cent (1 of 23) versus 11 per cent (3 of 28) respectively (P = 0·617). Nine patients (39 per cent) developed abdominal morbidity after SPDP, compared with 17 (61 per cent) after SSPD (P = 0·125). In the SPDP group, eight patients had grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), two of whom required further intervention. In the SSDP group, six of ten patients with grade B POPF required CT‐guided drainage, and a further five patients required reoperation for other causes. There were more reinterventions after SSDP: 11 of 28 (39 per cent) versus 3 of 23 (13 per cent) in the SPDP group (P = 0·037).ConclusionSPDP was performed more often in younger patients and at a shorter interval after severe blunt pancreatic injury. SPDP was associated with fewer reinterventions.

Development and validation of a pancreatic injury mortality score (PIMS) based on 473 consecutive patients treated at a level 1 trauma center

BackgroundThis study sought to develop a pancreatic injury mortality score (PIMS) to identify patients at greatest risk of in-hospital mortality after a major pancreatic injury. MethodsThe study used data from a prospective database of 473 patients treated for pancreatic injuries between January 1990 and December 2015. Two thirds of the patients were assigned to the derivation cohort and one third to the validation cohort. Clinical correlates of in-hospital death were identified and considered in stepwise logistic regression analyses that identified the factors included in the risk index. ResultsFive variables, age >55, shock on admission, a vascular injury, number of associated injuries and American Association for the Study of Trauma (AAST) pancreatic injury scale correlated with in-hospital death and were used to calculate PIMS. The final score ROC in the derivation dataset was 0.84 (95% CI 0.79–0.89) and in the validation dataset was 0.91 (95% CI 0.84–0.97), which were comparable (p = 0.1). Finally, cut-off scores were used to generate three risk groups and the rate of mortality within the low (PIMS 0–4), medium (PIMS 5–9), and high risk (PIMS 10–20) groups were not significantly different. The scoring system was tested in a validation cohort and showed good calibration and discrimination for in-hospital mortality. ConclusionsWe have derived and validated the PIMS, a novel organ-specific risk prediction score calculated from five variables for in-hospital mortality following major pancreatic trauma. PIMS is simple, quick and easily understandable, increases clinical risk prediction for patients with complex pancreatic and can be used as a benchmark for survival.

Diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography in the management of traumatic pancreatic duct injury patients: Single center experience for 34 years

BackgroundTraumatic pancreatic injuries are rare and present diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties. We evaluated the usefulness of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and transpapillary pancreatic stent in the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic trauma patients. MethodsWe reviewed medical records of 83 pancreas trauma patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography for the suspicion of pancreas duct injury between January 1983 and December 2016. Patient notes, radiologic findings, laboratory investigations, operative records, and endoscopic retrograde pancreatography reports were reviewed. ResultsPre-endoscopic retrograde pancreatography abdominal computed tomography was performed in 52 patients. Twenty-seven patients of them were diagnosed with a major pancreatic duct injury by subsequent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Eleven major pancreatic duct injuries (40.7%) were missed by the pre-endoscopic retrograde pancreatography abdominal CT. Major pancreatic duct injury was confirmed by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography in 43 patients. These 43 major pancreatic duct injury patients were classified into the Operative (n = 21), Stent (n = 15), and Conservative (n = 7) groups according to the first treatment modality which was chosen by attending surgeon. Age, initial white blood cell count, initial serum amylase, associated injury, and major pancreatic duct injury site were similar among groups, while the rate of parenchymal leakage (Dye leakage confined to pancreatic capsule) on endoscopic retrograde pancreatography findings differed. Parenchymal leakage was most common in the Conservative group. Pancreas related mortality occurred in 1 (4.76%) Operative group, 2 (13.33%) Stent group, and 0 (0%) Conservative group. Pancreas related complication occurred in 16 (76.19%) Operative group, 10 (66.67%), Stent group and 5 (71.43%) Conservative group. There were no statistically significant differences in the occurrence rate of pancreas related complications and mortalities among three groups. ConclusionEndoscopic retrograde pancreatography helps clinicians choose a treatment modality for major pancreatic duct injury since it provides information about the precise condition of the major pancreatic duct injury. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography with transpapillary pancreatic stenting also shows promise as a substitute for laparotomy or pancreatic resection in selected patients.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

This study evaluated 30-day morbidity and mortality and assessed pancreas-specific complications in patients with major pancreatic injuries who underwent a distal pancreatectomy.Records of 107 consecutive patients who underwent a distal pancreatectomy at a Level 1 Trauma Centre in Cape Town between January 1982 and December 2011 were reviewed. Primary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and death. Complications were graded according to the Clavien–Dindo severity classification and the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definitions.A total of 107 patients [94 men, median age 26, median RTS 7.8, 69 penetrating injuries (63 gunshot wounds, 6 stabs wounds), 38 blunt injuries] underwent distal pancreatectomy. Overall mortality was 12%, 16% for gunshot injuries, 8% for blunt trauma and 0% in patients who had stab wounds. Eighty patients had a post-operative complication. A pancreatic leak (n = 26) was the most common pancreatic related complication. Median postoperative stay in 28 patients with no or grade I complications was 9 days; in 11 patients with grade II complications was 18 days; in 14 grade IIIa, 31 days; in 19 grade IIIb, 38 days; in 8 grade IVa, 33 days in 14 grade IVb, and in 13 grade V the duration of postoperative stay was 14 ± 39.4 days.Overall mortality for distal pancreatectomy was 12%. Pancreatic leak was a common cause of morbidity. Length of hospitalisation increased with increasing Clavien–Dindo severity grading. There was a significant difference in the duration of hospitalisation in patients with no or grade I complications compared to those with grade II–IV injuries (p < 0.05).

Surgical reconstruction and endoscopic pancreatic stent for traumatic pancreatic duct disruption

Nonoperative management is acceptable treatment for minor pancreatic injuries. However, management of major pancreatic duct injury in children remains controversial. We present our experience in treating isolated pancreatic duct injury. We describe the cases of three male patients treated for complete pancreatic duct disruption in the past 5 years at our institution. We performed pancreatic duct repair to avoid distal pancreatectomy and to maintain normal pancreatic function. All patients underwent enhanced computed tomography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the early period. The injuries were classified as grade III according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification. In two cases, we performed end-to-end anastomosis of the pancreatic duct during the delayed period. In the third case, we placed a stent across the disruption to the distal pancreatic duct. The patients' postoperative courses were uneventful, and the average hospitalization was 25.6 days after the procedure. At a median follow-up of 36 months (range 14-54 months), all patients remain asymptomatic, with normal pancreatic function, but with persistent distal pancreatic duct dilatation. We suggest that distal pancreatectomy should not be routinely performed in patients with isolated pancreatic duct injury.

Morbidity and mortality after distal pancreatectomy for trauma: A critical appraisal of 107 consecutive patients undergoing resection at a Level 1 Trauma Centre

BackgroundThis study evaluated 30-day morbidity and mortality and assessed pancreas-specific complications in patients with major pancreatic injuries who underwent a distal pancreatectomy. Study designRecords of 107 consecutive patients who underwent a distal pancreatectomy at a Level 1 Trauma Centre in Cape Town between January 1982 and December 2011 were reviewed. Primary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and death. Complications were graded according to the Clavien–Dindo severity classification and the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definitions. ResultsA total of 107 patients [94 men, median age 26, median RTS 7.8, 69 penetrating injuries (63 gunshot wounds, 6 stabs wounds), 38 blunt injuries] underwent distal pancreatectomy. Overall mortality was 12%, 16% for gunshot injuries, 8% for blunt trauma and 0% in patients who had stab wounds. Eighty patients had a post-operative complication. A pancreatic leak (n=26) was the most common pancreatic related complication. Median postoperative stay in 28 patients with no or grade I complications was 9 days; in 11 patients with grade II complications was 18 days; in 14 grade IIIa, 31 days; in 19 grade IIIb, 38 days; in 8 grade IVa, 33 days in 14 grade IVb, and in 13 grade V the duration of postoperative stay was 14±39.4 days. ConclusionsOverall mortality for distal pancreatectomy was 12%. Pancreatic leak was a common cause of morbidity. Length of hospitalisation increased with increasing Clavien–Dindo severity grading. There was a significant difference in the duration of hospitalisation in patients with no or grade I complications compared to those with grade II–IV injuries (p<0.05).

鋭的外傷による主膵管損傷に膵縫合術と内視鏡的ステント留置を併用した1例

鋭的外傷による主膵管損傷に膵縫合術と内視鏡的ステント留置を併用した1例

Management of Blunt Pancreatic Injury by Applying the Principles of Damage Control Surgery: Experience at a Single Institution

This study analyzes the outcomes of treatment for blunt pancreatic injuries by applying the principles of damage control surgery and discusses the management of those injuries. Medical records of the patients who received surgical treatment for blunt pancreatic injury during the last 30 months were investigated retrospectively. A total of 23 patients were confirmed to have pancreatic injury in laparotomy during the investigation period. Based on the final surgical findings, 3 patients were classified into grade I, 9 into grade II, 7 into grade III, 2 into grade IV, and 2 into grade V by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma - Organ Injury Scale classification. Damage control surgery was performed for 17 patients (73.9%). As a result, 8 cases of pancreatic complication, such as fistula, pseudocyst or abscess, were observed in 6 patients (26.1%). Three patients died with a mortality rate of 13.0%. The causes of death were hemorrhage in other organs and multiple organ failure. For a good prognosis, the first operation time after injury should be decreased and surgical technique should be simplified by damage control surgery to reduce complications as well as to prevent exacerbation of the general condition in patients with major pancreatic injury.

Nonoperative management of pancreatic injuries in pediatric patients

Nonoperative management of minor pancreatic injury is the generally accepted approach. However, the management of major pancreatic injury remains controversial in pediatric patients. The aim of the present study was to determine the safety and efficacy of nonoperative management of pancreatic injury in pediatric patients. Between 2003 and 2009, 31 patients, 28 male and 3 female, with pancreatic injury due to blunt abdominal trauma were treated in our clinic. All patients were evaluated by ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), and evaluation of serum amylase levels. Patients with ongoing hemodynamic instability after resuscitation or signs of bowel perforation underwent immediate laparotomy, and the remaining patients were conservatively treated. Conservative treatment consisted of nasogastric tube replacement, total parenteral nutrition, monitoring of amylase levels, and serial clinical examination. The most common mechanism of injury was a fall (35.4%). Ten patients (32.2%) had associated extra-abdominal injuries, and 18 patients (58.1%) had associated abdominal injuries. The spleen was the most common site of intra-abdominal injury that was associated with pancreatic trauma. Initial amylase levels were normal in 5 patients, whose CT scans revealed pancreatic injury. Twenty-five patients (80.6%) were conservatively treated. Six patients (19.4%) required surgical intervention because of a hollow viscus or diaphragmatic injury and hemodynamic instability. A pseudocyst developed in 11 of the 25 patients who were nonoperatively treated; 6 patients required intervention for the pseudocyst (percutaneous drainage and cystogastrostomy). No patient succumbed to injury. The majority of the pancreatic injuries in pediatric patients can be successfully treated conservatively, unless there is hemodynamic instability and a hollow viscus injury. The most common complication is a pseudocyst.

Non-Operative Treatment of Pancreatic Trauma with Major Pancreatic Ductal Injury

Non-Operative Treatment of Pancreatic Trauma with Major Pancreatic Ductal Injury

Multidetector-Row Computed Tomography (CT) of Blunt Pancreatic Injuries: Can Contrast-Enhanced Multiphasic CT Detect Pancreatic Duct Injuries?

We examined patients of blunt trauma with contrast-enhanced multiphasic computed tomography (CT) and determined if it could detect pancreatic duct injuries. During a 17-month period, 95 patients of blunt abdominal trauma underwent multiphasic CT examinations. The CT grading scales of pancreatic injuries at parenchymal phase, portal venous phase, and equilibrium phase were recorded and compared with surgery, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, or discharged diagnosis. The diagnostic values of multiphasic CT and interobserver agreements at different phases were computed. Of the 95 patients, nine (9.5%) had pancreatic injuries (six with main duct injuries, three without main duct injuries). The interobserver agreement presented in kappa values between two radiologists regarding the integrity or disruption of the main duct were good at parenchymal phase (K = 0.73), portal venous phase (K = 0.64), and equilibrium phase (K = 0.68). The overall accuracies of multiphasic CT in detecting main duct injuries were 97.9% (parenchymal phase), 100.0% (portal venous phase), and 96.8% (equilibrium phase), respectively. The sensitivity (50.0%) and negative predictive value (96.7%) of equilibrium phase CT were the lowest among the three phases of CT scans. The portal venous phase CT was the most accurate scan to detect pancreatic duct injuries. However, equilibrium phase CT might underestimate major pancreatic injuries. Multiphasic CT shows early promise in this clinical application and further multi-institutional studies to verify its accuracy and reveal the optimal CT methodology are needed.

Surgical Management of Major Pancreatic Injury in Children

Major or complicated pancreatic trauma in children is uncommon and management strategies remain controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate our experience with both early and delayed surgery in these pediatric cases. We carried out a retrospective analysis of data of pediatric patients with major or complicated pancreatic injury operated on between January 1994 and December 2005 in our pediatric trauma center. Thirteen children (9 boys and 4 girls) with a mean age of 8.5 years (range 3 - 16 years) were operated for major or complicated pancreatic injury. The extent of injury was: grade II (major contusion without duct injury or tissue loss) in 4 children; grade III (distal transection) in 5 children and grade IV injury (proximal transection) in four patients. Pseudocyst developed in 8 children: 4 with grade II injury, 2 with grade III injury and 2 with grade IV injury (one with abdominal pseudocyst and one with an abdominal and a mediastinal pseudocyst). Early diagnosis and operation was achieved in 5 cases, while delayed diagnosis and operation occurred in 8. Three children underwent cystogastrostomy; 6 had a spleen-sparing distal pancreatectomy and 4 had resection with Roux-en-Y jejunostomy drainage. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) was the most useful diagnostic tool in assessing ductal injury. There were no deaths or long-term morbidity in our group of patients. Our results support the view that early operation is important in ductal pancreatic injury. We recommend transferring children with a suspected ductal injury to a tertiary center with experience in both pediatric ERCP and pancreatic surgery.

Blunt pancreatic trauma and pseudocyst: Management of major pancreatic duct injury

When there is no major pancreatic duct injury or the injury involves only the distal duct, percutaneous drainage should be considered the primary therapeutic procedure for traumatic pancreatic pseudocyst. If the pseudocyst does not then resolve, endoscopic retrograde pancreatography should be performed to prove proximal duct injury. When the major pancreatic duct is disrupted but not obstructed, pancreatic duct stenting may avert surgical resection. If the major duct is obstructed, surgical resection is required.

Long-term results of endoscopic stent in the management of blunt major pancreatic duct injury

Pancreatic stents can be used to treat a variety of acute and chronic pancreatic lesions. Sporadic successful trials in trauma patients have been reported. To our knowledge, however, a series with long-term follow-up has not previously been reported. We treated six patients in a 6-year period and report the long-term results. From February 1999 to February 2005, six blunt-trauma patients with major pancreatic duct disruption were treated with pancreatic duct stent at a single trauma center. Assessment of injury severity and diagnosis were based on abdominal computed tomography (CT) and proved by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP), with chart review used to establish mechanism of injury, timing of ERP, and stent placement, as well as the long-term outcome. Three of the six injuries were classified AAST grade III and three were grade IV; the interval to ERP with stent placement ranged from 8 hours to 22 days after the injury. One patient developed sepsis and died. One patient's stent could be removed early (52 days post-stenting) with mild ductal stricture, whereas the other four were complicated by severe ductal stricture that required repeated and prolonged stenting treatment. Removal of the stents was only possible in three of these four cases (at 12, 19, and 39 months, respectively), with stent dislodgment in the pancreatic duct occurring in another. Stent therapy may avoid surgery in the acute trauma stage, and may be preserved as another choice for acute grade IV pancreatic injury. However, variant outcome and long-term ductal stricture reveal that the role of pancreatic duct stent is uncertain and may not be suitable for acute grade III pancreatic injury. However, it needs more clinical data to define the value in the acute blunt pancreatic duct injury.

The management of complex pancreatic injuries.

Major injuries of the pancreas are uncommon, but may result in considerable morbidity and mortality because of the magnitude of associated vascular and duodenal injuries or underestimation of the extent of the pancreatic injury. Prognosis is influenced by the cause and complexity of the pancreatic injury, the amount of blood lost, duration of shock, speed of resuscitation and quality and nature of surgical intervention. Early mortality usually results from uncontrolled or massive bleeding due to associated vascular and adjacent organ injuries. Late mortality is a consequence of infection or multiple organ failure. Neglect of major pancreatic duct injury may lead to life-threatening complications including pseudocysts, fistulas, pancreatitis, sepsis and secondary haemorrhage. Careful operative assessment to determine the extent of gland damage and the likelihood of duct injury is usually sufficient to allow planning of further management. This strategy provides a simple approach to the management of pancreatic injuries regardless of the cause. Four situations are defined by the extent and site of injury: (i) minor lacerations, stabs or gunshot wounds of the superior or inferior border of the body or tail of the pancreas (i.e. remote from the main pancreatic duct), without visible duct involvement, are best managed by external drainage; (ii) major lacerations or gunshot or stab wounds in the body or tail with visible duct involvement or transection of more than half the width of the pancreas are treated by distal pancreatectomy; (iii) stab wounds, gunshot wounds and contusions of the head of the pancreas without devitalisation of pancreatic tissue are managed by external drainage, provided that any associated duodenal injury is amenable to simple repair; and (iv) non-reconstructable injuries with disruption of the ampullary-biliary-pancreatic union or major devitalising injuries of the pancreatic head and duodenum in stable patients are best treated by pancreatoduodenectomy. Internal drainage or complex defunctioning procedures are not useful in the emergency management of pancreatic injuries, and can be avoided without increasing morbidity. Unstable patients may require initial damage control before later definitive surgery. Successful treatment of complex injuries of the head of the pancreas depends largely on initial correct assessment and appropriate treatment. The management of these severe proximal pancreatic injuries remains one of the most difficult challenges in abdominal trauma surgery, and optimal results are most likely to be obtained by an experienced multidisciplinary team.

Management of blunt major pancreatic injury.

Major duct injury is the principal determinant of outcome for patients with pancreatic trauma, and there are a number of therapeutic choices available specific to the location of the insult. We report a series of blunt major pancreatic injury cases, with a review of the different procedures used and a discussion of the results. A total of 48 cases of blunt major pancreatic injury treated during a 10-year period at one trauma center were reviewed retrospectively. Diagnosis and assessment of injury severity were based on imaging studies and proved by surgical findings. Charts were reviewed to establish the mechanism of injury, surgical indications and imaging studies, management strategy, and outcome. Of the 32 grade III patients, 19 underwent distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy, 8 had pancreatectomy with preservation of the spleen, and 2 received a pancreatic duct stent, with the remaining 3 individuals undergoing nonsurgical treatment, pancreaticojejunostomy, and drainage alone, respectively. The grade III complication rate was 60.6%. Of the 14 grade IV patients, 4 underwent drainage alone because of the severity of the associated injuries, 4 underwent pancreaticojejunostomy, 3 had distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy, and 1 underwent distal pancreatectomy. The two remaining patients received a pancreatic duct stent. The grade IV complication rate was 53.8%. The Whipple procedure was performed for two grade V patients; one died subsequently. For all 48 patients, intraabdominal abscess was the most common morbidity (n = 11) followed, in order of prevalence, by major duct stricture (n = 4), pancreatitis (n = 2), pseudocyst (n = 2), pancreatic fistula (n = 1), and biliary fistula (n = 1). All stented cases developed complications, with one dying and three experiencing major duct stricture. The complication rate for our cases of blunt major pancreatic injury was high (62.2%), especially when treatment was delayed more than 24 hours; the same result was also noted for cases transferred from other institutions. Distal pancreatectomy with spleen preservation had a lower complication rate (22.2%) compared with other procedures and is suggested for grade III and grade IV injuries. Magnetic resonance pancreatography was unreliable early after injury but was effective in the chronic stage. Although pancreatic duct stenting can be used to treat posttraumatic pancreatic fistula and pseudocyst, the major duct stricture in the chronic stage of recovery and the risk of sepsis in the acute stage must be overcome.

Detecting Blunt Pancreatic Injuries

Pancreatic injury after blunt abdominal trauma is exceedingly uncommon, occurring in less than 5% of major abdominal injuries. When blunt pancreatic injury does occur, however, it is notoriously difficult to identify. The use of serum amylase has been advocated in the diagnosis of such injury, yet it is neither sensitive nor specific. Computed tomography has become widely accepted in the evaluation of hemodynamically stable patients after blunt abdominal trauma, although it is clearly not a sensitive modality for the detection of pancreatic injury. In fact, numerous examples of normal CT scans with missed pancreatic injury have been documented. However, careful attention to CT technique and awareness of the CT manifestations of pancreatic injury may facilitate the diagnosis of pancreatic injury. Additionally, important information about the pancreatic duct can be obtained with the use of MRI-pancreatography or endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Accurate, timely identification of major pancreatic ductal injury is imperative because delay in diagnosis and associated vascular injuries are largely responsible for the high morbidity and mortality associated with blunt pancreatic trauma. Blunt pancreatic trauma can be managed successfully by means of both operative and selective approaches. ( J Gastrointest Surg 2002; 6:587–598.)