To investigate the importance of route of nutrient administration on septic complications after blunt and penetrating trauma, 98 patients with an abdominal trauma index of at least 15 were randomized to either enteral or parenteral feeding within 24 hours of injury. Septic morbidity was defined as pneumonia, intra-abdominal abscess, empyema, line sepsis, or fasciitis with wound dehiscence. Patients were fed formulas with almost identical amounts of fat, carbohydrate, and protein. Two patients died early in the study. The enteral group sustained significantly fewer pneumonias (11.8% versus total parenteral nutrition 31.%, p less than 0.02), intra-abdominal abscess (1.9% versus total parenteral nutrition 13.3%, p less than 0.04), and line sepsis (1.9% versus total parenteral nutrition 13.3%, p less than 0.04), and sustained significantly fewer infections per patient (p less than 0.03), as well as significantly fewer infections per infected patient (p less than 0.05). Although there were no differences in infection rates in patients with injury severity score less than 20 or abdominal trauma index less than or equal to 24, there were significantly fewer infections in patients with an injury severity score greater than 20 (p less than 0.002) and abdominal trauma index greater than 24 (p less than 0.005). Enteral feeding produced significantly fewer infections in the penetrating group (p less than 0.05) and barely missed the statistical significance in the blunt-injured patients (p = 0.08). In the subpopulation of patients requiring more than 20 units of blood, sustaining an abdominal trauma index greater than 40 or requiring reoperation within 72 hours, there were significantly fewer infections per patient (p = 0.03) and significantly fewer infections per infected patient (p less than 0.01). There is a significantly lower incidence of septic morbidity in patients fed enterally after blunt and penetrating trauma, with most of the significant changes occurring in the more severely injured patients. The authors recommend that the surgeon obtain enteral access at the time of initial celiotomy to assure an opportunity for enteral delivery of nutrients, particularly in the most severely injured patients.

Nonoperative management is safe for hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury, regardless of injury severity. There are fewer abdominal complications and less transfusions when compared with a matched cohort of operated patients. Based on admission characteristics or CT scan, it is not possible to predict failures; therefore, intensive care unit monitoring is necessary.

ObjectiveTo analyze the outcome of hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury managed nonoperatively, and to examine the impact of this approach on the outcome of all patients with blunt hepatic injury. Summary Background DataUntil recently, operative management has been the standard for liver injury. A prospective trial from the authors' institution had shown that nonoperative management could safely be applied to hemodynamically stable patients with blunt hepatic injury. The present study reviewed the authors' institutional experience with blunt hepatic trauma since that trial and compared the results with prior institutional experience. MethodsSix hundred sixty-one patients with blunt hepatic trauma during the 5-year period ending December 1998 were reviewed (NONOP2). The outcomes were compared with two previous studies from this institution: operative 1985 to 1990 (OP) and nonoperative 1993 to 1994 (NONOP1). ResultsAll 168 OP patients were managed operatively. Twenty-four (18%) of 136 NONOP1 patients and 101 (15%) of the 661 NONOP2 patients required immediate exploration for hemodynamic instability. Forty-two (7%) patients failed nonoperative management; 20 were liver-related. Liver-related failures of nonoperative management were associated with highergrade injuries and with larger amounts of hemoperitoneum on computed tomography scanning. Twenty-four-hour transfusions, abdominal infections, and hospital length of stay were all significantly lower in the NONOP1 and NONOP2 groups versus the OP cohort. The liver-related death rate was constant at 4% in the three cohorts over the three time periods. ConclusionsAlthough urgent surgery continues to be the standard for hemodynamically compromised patients with blunt hepatic trauma, there has been a paradigm shift in the management of hemodynamically stable patients. Approximately 85% of all patients with blunt hepatic trauma are stable. In this group, nonoperative management significantly improves outcomes over operative management in terms of decreased abdominal infections, decreased transfusions, and decreased lengths of hospital stay.

Aggressive surveillance for and embolization of posttraumatic splenic artery pseudoaneurysms improved the rate of successful nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma to 61%, with a nonoperative failure rate of only 6%. In comparison with our previous work, this reduction in failure of nonoperative management is a significant improvement (p < 0.03).