Primary repair versus resection for American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grades I and II colon injuries: Does the management approach really matter? An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Caitlin A Fitzgerald, Christopher Barnes, Erika K Bisgaard, Bryant J McLafferty, Kevin N Harrell, Matthew M Fleming, Jonathan P Meizoso, James Walker, Jason D Sciarretta, Bahaa E Succar, Mingyuan Cheng, Richard H Lewis, Greggory R Davis, Odessa Puli, Tanya Egodage, Jennifer Mooney, Stacy Nguyen, Jordan M Kirsch, Anna Mary Jose, Derek Lumbard, Andreana Finn, Kyle Sheppard, Korey S Shively, Caleb Butts, Alaina M Lasinski, Nicholas G Beattie, Mary N Noory, Sejul A Chaudhary, William Irish, Pak Leung, Karla Luketic, Matthew Noorbakhsh, Khalid Almahmoud, Alison Cash, Andrew C Bernard, Arathi Kumar, Anthony J DeSantis, Rosemary A Kozar, Ajay Prasad, Anaar E Siletz, Thomas J Schroeppel, Jennifer Rodriquez, Nichole Tackett, Caleb Mentzer, Anna Sabu-Kurian, Brittany K Bankhead, Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Adrian A Maung, Grace Chang, Uma Ramoutar, Michael S Farrell, Marah Hamdan, Yee M Wong, Ryan T Deci, Luis Fernandez, Brandi Pero, Carlos H Palacio, Juan J Rendon Garcia, James J Myall, Andrew J Riggle, Simin Golestani, Joshua Dilday, April Miller, Luis Taveras, Payton Grande, Stephanie Scott, Ryan P Dumas
{"title":"Primary repair versus resection for American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grades I and II colon injuries: Does the management approach really matter? An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter trial.","authors":"Caitlin A Fitzgerald, Christopher Barnes, Erika K Bisgaard, Bryant J McLafferty, Kevin N Harrell, Matthew M Fleming, Jonathan P Meizoso, James Walker, Jason D Sciarretta, Bahaa E Succar, Mingyuan Cheng, Richard H Lewis, Greggory R Davis, Odessa Puli, Tanya Egodage, Jennifer Mooney, Stacy Nguyen, Jordan M Kirsch, Anna Mary Jose, Derek Lumbard, Andreana Finn, Kyle Sheppard, Korey S Shively, Caleb Butts, Alaina M Lasinski, Nicholas G Beattie, Mary N Noory, Sejul A Chaudhary, William Irish, Pak Leung, Karla Luketic, Matthew Noorbakhsh, Khalid Almahmoud, Alison Cash, Andrew C Bernard, Arathi Kumar, Anthony J DeSantis, Rosemary A Kozar, Ajay Prasad, Anaar E Siletz, Thomas J Schroeppel, Jennifer Rodriquez, Nichole Tackett, Caleb Mentzer, Anna Sabu-Kurian, Brittany K Bankhead, Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Adrian A Maung, Grace Chang, Uma Ramoutar, Michael S Farrell, Marah Hamdan, Yee M Wong, Ryan T Deci, Luis Fernandez, Brandi Pero, Carlos H Palacio, Juan J Rendon Garcia, James J Myall, Andrew J Riggle, Simin Golestani, Joshua Dilday, April Miller, Luis Taveras, Payton Grande, Stephanie Scott, Ryan P Dumas","doi":"10.1097/TA.0000000000004649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of traumatic low-grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma [AAST] grades I and II) colon injuries has evolved. Recent data suggest that primary repair (PR) or resection over colostomy decreases morbidity and mortality. However, data comparing patients undergoing PR versus resection with anastomosis (RWA) are lacking. We hypothesized that patients presenting with low-grade colon injuries undergoing PR would have fewer postoperative complications than patients undergoing RWA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective, multicenter analysis of all patients presenting with AAST grades I and II colon injuries to 32 Level 1 trauma centers from 2011 to 2021. Based on operative documentation, patients were dichotomized into two groups, those who underwent PR or RWA. Outcomes included length of stay, infectious complications, and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the independent effect of operative technique on outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2,022 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. Most were young (36 [24-44] years), male (79.6%), and presented after penetrating trauma (58.2%). A total of 1,013 patients presented with a grade I injury, while 1,009 patients presented with a grade II injury. Furthermore, 1,314 patients underwent PR, and 708 underwent RWA. While there was no difference in Injury Severity Score between PR and RWA, RWA was associated with more adverse outcomes including surgical site infections, suture line failure/leak, fascial dehiscence, and a longer hospital length of stay (all p < 0.001). When controlling for mechanism of injury, AAST grade, Injury Severity Score, and number of intra-abdominal injuries RWA were independently associated with more infectious complications including superficial, deep, and organ space surgical site infections.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Resection with anastomosis was independently associated with more adverse outcomes including multiple infectious complications and longer hospital length of stay compared with PR, suggesting that low-grade colon injuries can be safely managed with PR alone.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Multicenter Retrospective Comparative Study; Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":17453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004649","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The management of traumatic low-grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma [AAST] grades I and II) colon injuries has evolved. Recent data suggest that primary repair (PR) or resection over colostomy decreases morbidity and mortality. However, data comparing patients undergoing PR versus resection with anastomosis (RWA) are lacking. We hypothesized that patients presenting with low-grade colon injuries undergoing PR would have fewer postoperative complications than patients undergoing RWA.

Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter analysis of all patients presenting with AAST grades I and II colon injuries to 32 Level 1 trauma centers from 2011 to 2021. Based on operative documentation, patients were dichotomized into two groups, those who underwent PR or RWA. Outcomes included length of stay, infectious complications, and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the independent effect of operative technique on outcomes.

Results: A total of 2,022 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study. Most were young (36 [24-44] years), male (79.6%), and presented after penetrating trauma (58.2%). A total of 1,013 patients presented with a grade I injury, while 1,009 patients presented with a grade II injury. Furthermore, 1,314 patients underwent PR, and 708 underwent RWA. While there was no difference in Injury Severity Score between PR and RWA, RWA was associated with more adverse outcomes including surgical site infections, suture line failure/leak, fascial dehiscence, and a longer hospital length of stay (all p < 0.001). When controlling for mechanism of injury, AAST grade, Injury Severity Score, and number of intra-abdominal injuries RWA were independently associated with more infectious complications including superficial, deep, and organ space surgical site infections.

Conclusion: Resection with anastomosis was independently associated with more adverse outcomes including multiple infectious complications and longer hospital length of stay compared with PR, suggesting that low-grade colon injuries can be safely managed with PR alone.

Level of evidence: Multicenter Retrospective Comparative Study; Level III.

美国创伤外科协会I级和II级结肠损伤的初步修复与切除:处理方法真的重要吗?东部创伤外科协会多中心试验。
背景:创伤性低级别(美国创伤外科协会[AAST]分级I级和II级)结肠损伤的处理已经发生了变化。最近的数据显示,一期修复(PR)或切除结肠造口可降低发病率和死亡率。然而,比较PR与切除吻合(RWA)患者的数据缺乏。我们假设,接受PR的低级别结肠损伤患者比接受RWA的患者术后并发症更少。方法:这是一项回顾性的多中心分析,包括2011年至2021年在32个一级创伤中心就诊的所有AAST I级和II级结肠损伤患者。根据手术记录,将患者分为两组,PR组和RWA组。结果包括住院时间、感染并发症和死亡率。采用多因素logistic回归来确定手术技术对预后的独立影响。结果:共有2,022例患者符合本研究的纳入标准。多数为年轻(36[24-44]岁),男性(79.6%),在穿透性创伤后出现(58.2%)。共有1013例患者出现I级损伤,而1009例患者出现II级损伤。此外,1314例患者行PR, 708例患者行RWA。虽然PR和RWA之间的损伤严重程度评分没有差异,但RWA与更多的不良后果相关,包括手术部位感染、缝合线失效/泄漏、筋膜开裂和更长的住院时间(均p < 0.001)。在控制损伤机制时,AAST分级、损伤严重程度评分和腹内损伤数量RWA与更多的感染性并发症(包括浅表、深部和器官间隙手术部位感染)独立相关。结论:与吻合术相比,吻合术切除有更多的不良反应,包括多种感染并发症和更长的住院时间,提示单纯吻合术治疗低级别结肠损伤是安全的。证据水平:多中心回顾性比较研究;第三层次。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
11.80%
发文量
637
审稿时长
2.7 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery® is designed to provide the scientific basis to optimize care of the severely injured and critically ill surgical patient. Thus, the Journal has a high priority for basic and translation research to fulfill this objectives. Additionally, the Journal is enthusiastic to publish randomized prospective clinical studies to establish care predicated on a mechanistic foundation. Finally, the Journal is seeking systematic reviews, guidelines and algorithms that incorporate the best evidence available.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信