2022
DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2022.42.155.33016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thoracic impalement injury by the barrel of a locally fabricated gun in 2 patients: case report

Abstract: Thoracic impalement injuries are uncommon among civilians. When it occurs, it´s usually a severe and dramatic form of chest injury that requires immediate operative intervention. The common mechanisms usually encountered involves either a patient falling from a height onto a pole, being driven into a pole following ejection during a road traffic accident or being impaled when a spear/an arrow is thrown at the patient or from long fragments following a blast. Impalement by a retrograde ejected barrel of a gun d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
(22 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast, stabbings encompass Type II classification as it involves impaling a stationary body [ 4 ]. Scant literature in management of impalement injuries can be explained by the overall low prevalence of thoracic impalement injuries [ [1] , [2] , [3] , 5 , 6 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In contrast, stabbings encompass Type II classification as it involves impaling a stationary body [ 4 ]. Scant literature in management of impalement injuries can be explained by the overall low prevalence of thoracic impalement injuries [ [1] , [2] , [3] , 5 , 6 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The traditional first line management of thoracic impalement injuries has long been through sternotomy or thoracotomy approach [ 1 ]. Although the scarcity of these cases has prevented development of a standard consensus or guideline on the initial surgical strategy [ 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%