1 / 23

Management of Penetrating Wounds: GSW to the Abdomen

Management of Penetrating Wounds: GSW to the Abdomen . Jowhara Al-Qahtani PGY-1, General Surgery 4/21/2014. Epidemiology:. High mortality, due to force and extensive injury and cavitation created by missile tract Account for 90%mortality associated with penetrating abdominal injuries

noel-galloway
Download Presentation

Management of Penetrating Wounds: GSW to the Abdomen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Management of Penetrating Wounds: GSW to the Abdomen Jowhara Al-Qahtani PGY-1, General Surgery 4/21/2014

  2. Epidemiology: • High mortality, due to force and extensive injury and cavitation created by missile tract • Account for 90%mortality associated with penetrating abdominal injuries • In USA, Africans Americans 14-34 yrs old have greatest death rate followed hispanics ( homocides)

  3. Anatomic zones:

  4. Mechanism of injury: • Force • Velocity • Energy • Projectile • Distance (most lethal GSW occu at close range <2.7m

  5. Types of GSW • Based on Distance • Type 1 (>6.4m) subcutaneous tissue and deep fascial layers • Type 2 (2.7-6.4m) abdominal cavity • Type 3 (<2.7 m) massive tissue loss and destruction, contaminants from debris

  6. Diagnostic Modalities • Generally unreliable due to distracting injury, AMS, spinal cord injury • Look for signs of intraperitoneal injury • abdominal tenderness, peritoneal irritation, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, hypovolemia, hypotension • entrance and exit wounds to determine path of injury. • Distention - pneumoperitoneum, gastric dilation, or ileus • Ecchymosis of flanks (Gray-Turner sign) or umbilicus (Cullen's sign) - retroperitoneal hemorrhage • Abdominal contusions – eg lap belts • DRE: blood or subcutaneous emphysema Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009

  7. Diagnostic Modalities • Plain radiographs: pneumoperitonium. Not great

  8. Diagnostic Modalities • CT scan, best for stable patients: triple contrast to r/o colorectal injuries • DPL: mostly for stab wounds, not GSW • high sensitive test, variable thresholds. • Aspiration of 10cc of blood • 5000-10000 RBC/HPF. • 100000 RBC/HPF+500WBC, bile or amylase • Not widely used anymore due to time needed to analyze, lack of specificity for organ injuries, and it is invasive nature. • FAST : very valuable in low chest and upper abdomen GSW

  9. FAST • Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) • To diagnose free intraperitoneal blood after blunt trauma • 4 areas: • Perihepatic & hepato-renal space (Morrison’s pouch) • Perisplenic • Pelvis (Pouch of Douglas/rectovesical pouch) • Pericardium (subxiphoid) • sensitivity 60 to 95% for detecting 100 mL - 500 mL of fluid • Extended FAST (E-FAST): • Add thoracic windows to look for pneumothorax. • Sensitivity 59%, specificity up to 99% for PTX (c/w CXR 20%) Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009 Trauma.org

  10. FAST • hepato-renal space) Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009

  11. FAST • Perisplenic view Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009

  12. Retrovesicle (Pouch of Douglas) Pericardium (subxiphoid)

  13. FAST • Advantages: • Portable, fast (<5 min), • No radiation or contrast • Less expensive • Disadvantages • Not as good for solid parenchymal damage, retroperitoneum, or diaphragmatic defects. • Limited by obesity, substantial bowel gas, and subcut air. • Can’t distinguish blood from ascites. • high (31%) false-negative rate in detecting hemoperitoneum in the presence of pelvic fracture

  14. Laparoscopy • Most useful to eval penetrating wounds to thoracoabdominal region in stable pt • esp for diaphragm injury: Sens 87.5%, specificity 100% • Can repair organs via the laparoscope • diaphragm, solid viscera, stomach, small bowel. • Disadvantages: • poor sensitivity for hollow visceral injury, retroperitoneum • Complications from trocar misplacement. • If diaphragm injury, PTX during insufflation Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009

  15. Management • ABC • Full physical examination, potential wounds in skin folds areas like axilla.

  16. Management:

  17. Management of penetrating abdominal trauma • Mandatory laparotomy vs • Selective nonoperative management

  18. Mandatory laparotomy • standard of care for abdominal stab wounds until 1960s, for GSWs until recently • Now thought unnecessary in 70% of abdominal stab wounds • Increased complication rates, length of stay, costs • Immediate laparotomy indicated for shock, evisceration, and peritonitis

  19. None operative Management • Started in 1960 for all penetrating wounds • Reserved for stable patients with no intra-abdominal (esp hollow viscous injuries) • Observation for 12-24 hrs • Laparotomy is higher in GSW than Stab wounds (SW) • Extra-peritoneal wounds are more common nowadays due to obesity !

  20. Antibiotics • All receive 1 dose upon presentation • Only to those GSW which require surgical intervention. • No prophylactic role in other GSWs

  21. Damage control • Patients with major exsanguinating injuries may not survive complex procedures • Control hemorrhage and contamination with abbreviated laparotomy followed by resuscitation prior to definitive repair • 0. initial resuscitation • 1. Control of hemorrhage and contamination • Control injured vasculature, bleeding solid organs • Abdominal packing • 2. back to the ICU for resuscitation • Correction of hypothermia, acidosis, coagulopathy • 3. Definitive repair of injuries • 4. Definitive closure of the abdomen • Complications: abdominal compartment syndrome. Waibel et al. Damage control in trauma and abdominal sepsis. Crit Care Med 2010 38:S421-430

  22. Thank you

  23. References • Puskarich, M. Initial evaluation and management of abdominal gunshot wounds in adults. Uptodate.Nov 2012 • Ball, G. current Management of penetrating torso trauma: nontheraputic is not good enough anymore. Jcan Chiv.april 2014 • Kumar, S, kumar A, Joshi.M, and Rathi.V. comparison of diagnositc peritoneal laage and ofcused assessment by sonography in trauma as adjunct to primary survey intorso trama: prospective randomized clinic trial. Ulus Trama Acil Cerr Derg,March 2014, Vol 20 No 20. • Biffl WL, Moore EE. Management guidelines for penetrating abdominal trauma. Curr Opin Crit Care 2010;16:609-617 • Marx: Rosen’s Emergency Medicine, 7th ed. 2009 Mosby

More Related