腹部创伤的损伤控制手术对严重创伤患者的生存效益有真正的影响吗?用荟萃分析对文献进行系统回顾。

IF 2.2
Michele Altomare, Andrea Spota, Stefano Piero Bernardo Cioffi, Silvia Gianola, Greta Castellini, Antonello Napoletano, Daniela Coclite, Primiano Iannone, Stefania Cimbanassi, Andrea Mingoli, Osvaldo Chiara
{"title":"腹部创伤的损伤控制手术对严重创伤患者的生存效益有真正的影响吗?用荟萃分析对文献进行系统回顾。","authors":"Michele Altomare, Andrea Spota, Stefano Piero Bernardo Cioffi, Silvia Gianola, Greta Castellini, Antonello Napoletano, Daniela Coclite, Primiano Iannone, Stefania Cimbanassi, Andrea Mingoli, Osvaldo Chiara","doi":"10.1007/s00068-025-02874-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma remains a principal cause of mortality across all age groups, particularly in cases of major abdominal trauma and hemorrhage, which can lead to the 'lethal triad' of coagulopathy, metabolic acidosis, and hypothermia. This systematic review explores the efficacy of Damage Control Laparotomy (DCL) compared to definitive surgery (DEF) in major abdominal trauma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines was conducted across Medline, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies were found, including one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and six observational studies (OS). Mortality rates varied, with one observational study indicating higher 24-h mortality in the DCS group (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.48, 4.68, I<sup>2</sup> = 86%), while the RCT showed a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate (OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.00, 0.99 P = 0.010). Notably, major complications did not differ significantly between the two approaches (RCT OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77; OS OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77). The overall certainty of evidence was rated low, reflecting heterogeneous outcomes and inconsistent reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although DCS is frequently utilized in trauma care, its superiority over definitive surgery remains unestablished, with ethical considerations complicating randomized trials. This review suggests that while DCS may be beneficial under specific conditions, robust multicentric studies are essential to clarify its impact on mortality and health outcomes compared to conventional surgery in abdominal trauma.</p>","PeriodicalId":520620,"journal":{"name":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","volume":"51 1","pages":"247"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does damage control surgery for abdominal trauma have a real impact on survival benefit in major trauma patients? A systematic review of literature with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Michele Altomare, Andrea Spota, Stefano Piero Bernardo Cioffi, Silvia Gianola, Greta Castellini, Antonello Napoletano, Daniela Coclite, Primiano Iannone, Stefania Cimbanassi, Andrea Mingoli, Osvaldo Chiara\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00068-025-02874-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma remains a principal cause of mortality across all age groups, particularly in cases of major abdominal trauma and hemorrhage, which can lead to the 'lethal triad' of coagulopathy, metabolic acidosis, and hypothermia. This systematic review explores the efficacy of Damage Control Laparotomy (DCL) compared to definitive surgery (DEF) in major abdominal trauma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines was conducted across Medline, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies were found, including one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and six observational studies (OS). Mortality rates varied, with one observational study indicating higher 24-h mortality in the DCS group (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.48, 4.68, I<sup>2</sup> = 86%), while the RCT showed a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate (OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.00, 0.99 P = 0.010). Notably, major complications did not differ significantly between the two approaches (RCT OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77; OS OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77). The overall certainty of evidence was rated low, reflecting heterogeneous outcomes and inconsistent reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although DCS is frequently utilized in trauma care, its superiority over definitive surgery remains unestablished, with ethical considerations complicating randomized trials. This review suggests that while DCS may be beneficial under specific conditions, robust multicentric studies are essential to clarify its impact on mortality and health outcomes compared to conventional surgery in abdominal trauma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"247\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02874-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02874-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:创伤仍然是所有年龄组死亡的主要原因,特别是在严重腹部创伤和出血的情况下,这可能导致凝血功能障碍、代谢性酸中毒和体温过低的“致命三合一”。本系统综述探讨损伤控制剖腹手术(DCL)与决定性手术(DEF)在腹部重大创伤中的疗效。方法:按照PRISMA和MOOSE指南,在Medline、Cochrane Library和Embase数据库中进行系统的文献检索。结果:共纳入7项研究,包括1项随机对照试验(RCT)和6项观察性研究(OS)。死亡率各不相同,一项观察性研究表明DCS组24小时死亡率较高(OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.48, 4.68, I2 = 86%),而RCT显示30天死亡率显著降低(OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.00, 0.99 P = 0.010)。值得注意的是,两种方法的主要并发症无显著差异(RCT OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77;OS或0.75,95% ci 0.20, 2.77)。证据的总体确定性被评为低,反映了结果的异质性和不一致的报告。结论:尽管DCS经常用于创伤护理,但其优于决定性手术的优势仍未确定,伦理考虑使随机试验复杂化。这篇综述表明,尽管DCS在特定情况下可能是有益的,但与常规腹部创伤手术相比,有必要进行强有力的多中心研究,以阐明其对死亡率和健康结果的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does damage control surgery for abdominal trauma have a real impact on survival benefit in major trauma patients? A systematic review of literature with meta-analysis.

Background: Trauma remains a principal cause of mortality across all age groups, particularly in cases of major abdominal trauma and hemorrhage, which can lead to the 'lethal triad' of coagulopathy, metabolic acidosis, and hypothermia. This systematic review explores the efficacy of Damage Control Laparotomy (DCL) compared to definitive surgery (DEF) in major abdominal trauma.

Methods: A systematic literature search following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines was conducted across Medline, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases.

Results: Seven studies were found, including one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and six observational studies (OS). Mortality rates varied, with one observational study indicating higher 24-h mortality in the DCS group (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.48, 4.68, I2 = 86%), while the RCT showed a significantly lower 30-day mortality rate (OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.00, 0.99 P = 0.010). Notably, major complications did not differ significantly between the two approaches (RCT OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77; OS OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.20, 2.77). The overall certainty of evidence was rated low, reflecting heterogeneous outcomes and inconsistent reporting.

Conclusion: Although DCS is frequently utilized in trauma care, its superiority over definitive surgery remains unestablished, with ethical considerations complicating randomized trials. This review suggests that while DCS may be beneficial under specific conditions, robust multicentric studies are essential to clarify its impact on mortality and health outcomes compared to conventional surgery in abdominal trauma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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