Display options
Share it on

J Trauma Manag Outcomes. 2014 Sep 15;8:14. doi: 10.1186/1752-2897-8-14. eCollection 2014.

Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication.

Journal of trauma management & outcomes

Ayman El-Menyar, Husham Abdelrahman, Hassan Al-Thani, Ahmad Zarour, Ashok Parchani, Ruben Peralta, Rifat Latifi

Affiliations

  1. Clinical Research Unit, Section of Trauma Surgery, Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar ; Clinical Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical School, Doha, Qatar ; Internal Medicine, Ahmed Maher teaching Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
  2. Section of Trauma Surgery, Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar.
  3. Section of Trauma Surgery, Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar ; Department of Surgery, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.

PMID: 25332723 PMCID: PMC4202251 DOI: 10.1186/1752-2897-8-14

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The mechanism and outcome of traumatic abdominal injury (TAI) varies worldwide. Moreover, data comparing TAIs in each abdominal compartment are lacking. We aimed to assess from the academic point of view, TAI based on its anatomical compartments.

PATIENTS & METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study for TAI patients between 2008 and 2011 in Qatar. Patients were categorized according to the involved anatomical compartment (C): intrathoracic (ITC), retroperitoneal (RPC), true abdomen (TAC), and pelvic abdomen (PAC) group. Chi Square test, One-Way ANOVA and multivariate regression analysis were appropriately performed.

RESULTS: Of 6,888 patients admitted to the trauma unit, 1,036 (15%) had TAI that were grouped as ITC (65%), RPC (15%), TAC (13%), and PAC (7%). The mean age was lowest in ITC (29 ± 13) and highest in TAC (34 ± 11) group, (P = 0.001). Motor vehicle crash was the main mechanism of injury in all groups except for PAC, in which fall dominated. Vast majority of expatriates had PAC and TAC injuries. The main abdominal injuries included liver (35%; ITC), spleen (32%; ITC) and kidneys (18%; RPC). Extra-abdominal injuries involved the head in RPC and ITC, lung in ITC and RPC and extremities in PAC. Mean ISS was higher in RPC and ITC. Abdominal AIS was higher in TAC injuries. Overall hospital mortality was 10%: RPC (15%), TAC (11%), ITC (9.4%) and PAC (1.5%). Concurrent traumatic brain injury (OR 5.3; P = 0.001) and need for blood transfusion (OR 3.03; P = 0.003) were the main independent predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSION: In addition to its academic value, the anatomical approach of TAI would be a complementary tool for better understanding and prediction of the pattern and outcome of TAI. This would be possible if further research find accurate, early diagnostic tool for this anatomical classification.

Keywords: Abdominal injury; Anatomical compartment; Mortality; Trauma

References

  1. ANZ J Surg. 2005 Sep;75(9):790-4 - PubMed
  2. N Am J Med Sci. 2012 Mar;4(3):129-34 - PubMed
  3. Acta Chir Belg. 2004 Aug;104(4):429-34 - PubMed
  4. Orthopade. 2005 Sep;34(9):880-8 - PubMed
  5. East Afr Med J. 2006 Jan;83(1):37-43 - PubMed
  6. Dan Med Bull. 2011 May;58(5):A4275 - PubMed
  7. Brain Inj. 2012;26(2):107-25 - PubMed
  8. Inj Prev. 2012 Apr;18(2):130-2 - PubMed
  9. Traffic Inj Prev. 2010 Aug;11(4):353-60 - PubMed
  10. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2010 Nov;16(6):497-502 - PubMed
  11. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2008 Aug;26(3):625-48, vii - PubMed
  12. Chirurg. 2005 Oct;76(10):927-34 - PubMed

Publication Types