Damage control laparotomy was first described by Dr. Harlan Stone in 1983 when he suggested that patients with severe trauma should have their primary procedures abbreviated when coagulopathy was encountered. He recommended temporizing patients with abdominal packing and temporary closure to allow restoration of normal physiology prior to returning to the operating room for definitive repair. The term damage control in the trauma setting was coined by Rotondo et al., in 1993. Studies in subsequent years have validated this technique by demonstrating decreased mortality and immediate post-operative complications. The indications for damage control laparotomy have evolved to encompass abdominal compartment syndrome, abdominal sepsis, vascular and acute care surgery cases. The perioperative critical care provided to these patients, including sedation, paralysis, nutrition, and fluid management strategies may improve closure rates and recovery. In the rare cases of inability to primarily close the abdomen, there are a number of reconstructive strategies that may be used in the acute and chronic phases of abdominal closure.

Epidemiologic study, level IV.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Injury is the leading cause of death in patients aged 1 to 45 years and contributes to a significant public health burden for individuals of all ages. To achieve zero preventable deaths and disability after injury, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine called for the development of a National Trauma Research Action Plan to improve outcomes for military and civilian trauma patients. Because rapid resuscitation and prompt identification and treatment of injuries are critical in achieving optimal outcomes, a panel of experts was convened to generate high-priority research questions in the areas of acute resuscitation, initial evaluation, imaging, and definitive management on injury. METHODS:Forty-three subject matter experts in trauma care and injury research were recruited to perform a gap analysis of current literature and prioritize unanswered research questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. Four Delphi rounds were conducted to generate research questions and prioritize them using a 9-point Likert scale. Research questions were stratified as low, medium, or high priority, with consensus defined as ≥60% of panelists agreeing on the priority category. Research questions were coded using a taxonomy of 118 research concepts that were standard across all National Trauma Research Action Plan panels. RESULTS:There were 1,422 questions generated, of which 992 (69.8%) reached consensus. Of the questions reaching consensus, 327 (33.0%) were given high priority, 621 (62.6%) medium priority, and 44 (4.4%) low priority. Pharmaceutical intervention and fluid/blood product resuscitation were most frequently scored as high-priority intervention concepts. Research questions related to traumatic brain injury, vascular injury, pelvic fracture, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis were highly prioritized. CONCLUSION: This research gap analysis identified more than 300 high-priority research questions within the broad category of Acute Resuscitation, Initial Evaluation, Imaging, and Definitive Management. Research funding should be prioritized to address these high-priority topics in the future. (J

No abstract

BACKGROUND:The frailty index is a known predictor of adverse outcomes in geriatric patients. Trauma-Specific Frailty Index (TSFI) was created and validated at a single center to accurately identify frailty and reliably predict worse outcomes among geriatric trauma patients. This study aims to prospectively validate the TSFI in a multi-institutional cohort of geriatric trauma patients. METHODS:This is a prospective, observational, multi-institutional trial across 17 American College of Surgeons Levels I, II, and III trauma centers. All geriatric trauma patients (65 years and older) presenting during a 3-year period were included. Frailty status was measured within 24 hours of admission using the TSFI (15 variables), and patients were stratified into nonfrail (TSFI, ≤0.12), prefrail (TSFI, 0.13-0.25), and frail (TSFI, >0.25) groups. Outcome measures included index admission mortality, discharge to rehabilitation centers or skilled nursing facilities (rehab/SNFs), and 3-month postdischarge readmissions, fall recurrences, complications, and mortality among survivors of index admission. RESULTS:A total of 1,321 geriatric trauma patients were identified and enrolled for validation of TSFI (nonfrail, 435 [33%]; prefrail, 392 [30%]; frail, 494 [37%]). The mean ± SD age was 77 ± 8 years; the median (interquartile range) Injury Severity Score was 9(5-13). Overall, 179 patients (14%) had a major complication, 554 (42%) were discharged to rehab/SNFs, and 63 (5%) died during the index admission. Compared with nonfrail patients, frail patients had significantly higher odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.93; p = 0.018), major complications (aOR, 3.55; p < 0.001), and discharge to rehab/SNFs (aOR, 1.98; p < 0.001). In addition, frailty was significantly associated with higher adjusted odds of mortality, major complications, readmissions, and fall recurrence at 3 months postdischarge ( p < 0.05). CONCLUSION:External applicability of the TSFI (15 variables) was evident at a multicenter cohort of 17 American College of Surgeons trauma centers in geriatric trauma patients. The TSFI emerged as an independent predictor of worse outcomes, both in the short-term and 3-month postdischarge.

No abstract

No abstract