Literature DB >> 27574344

Correlating MDCT Liver Injury Grade and Clinical Outcome in Patients Without Significant Extra-hepatic Injury.

Ravi Kumar1, Atin Kumar1, Vinit Baliyan1, Shivanand Gamanagatti1, Ashu Seith Bhalla1, Raju Sharma1, Amit Gupta2, Subodh Kumar2, M C Misra2.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to correlate multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) grading with clinical severity and outcome in liver trauma patients without significant extrahepatic injury. Over a period of 2 years (2011-2013), all patients showing evidence of liver injury on contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) abdomen and without significant extrahepatic trauma were prospectively included in the study. Correlation between the CT injury grade and outcome in terms of mortality, duration of ICU/hospital stay, fluid and blood requirements, need for intervention and complications were assessed. The significance of the difference in mortality, duration of ICU/hospital stay, fluid requirement and blood requirements among the patients with various injury grades was assessed by Kruskal-Wallis test. The significance of the difference in need for intervention and complications among the patients with various injury grades was assessed by Fisher's exact test. A total of 198 patients were found to have evidence of hepatic injury on CECT. Out of 198 patients, 117 had insignificant extrahepatic trauma. The overall mean age for these 117 patients was 25.74 ± 15.53 (age range 2-84 years). Death rates according to AAST grades were 0 % in grades II and III, 6.89 % in grade IV and 9.09 % in grade V (p = 0.053). The mean ICU and total hospital stay for grade II was 1.32 and 5.91 days, for grade III was 1.76 and 8.48, for grade IV was 2.86 and 10.31 days and for grade V was 6.54 and 12 days, respectively (p = 0.0001 for ICU, p = 0.0003 for total stay). Mean input and fluid deficit according to various grades were 8634/2607 ml for grade II, 9535/2555 ml for grade III, 15,549/6242 ml for grade IV and 19,958/8280 ml for grade V (p value input-0.0016, output-input (fluid deficit)-0.0001). Average unit of RBC and sum of the blood products transfused were 1.73 and 2.26 for grade II, 2.18 and 2.72 for grade III, 3.03 and 6.27 for grade IV, 6.85 and 38.12 for grade V, respectively (p value RBC-0.10, total-0.037). The difference in the need of active surgical/endovascular intervention and complication rates was not significantly higher in higher injury grades. The grading of liver injury based on CECT findings can predict the clinical course in liver trauma patients with insignificant extrahepatic injuries.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood transfusion; Clinical correlation and AAST grading; Fluid deficit; Liver trauma; MDCT AAST (American association for surgery of trauma) grading; Stay in hospital (ICU stay and ward stay)

Year:  2015        PMID: 27574344      PMCID: PMC4987552          DOI: 10.1007/s12262-015-1355-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Surg        ISSN: 0973-9793            Impact factor:   0.656


  23 in total

1.  The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care.

Authors:  S P Baker; B O'Neill; W Haddon; W B Long
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1974-03

2.  Trends in the management of hepatic injury.

Authors:  K J Brasel; C M DeLisle; C J Olson; D C Borgstrom
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  CT criteria for management of blunt liver trauma: correlation with angiographic and surgical findings.

Authors:  P A Poletti; S E Mirvis; K Shanmuganathan; K L Killeen; D Coldwell
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Nonoperative management of hepatic, splenic, and renal injuries in adults with multiple injuries.

Authors:  K H Sartorelli; C Frumiento; F B Rogers; T M Osler
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2000-07

5.  Utility of radiographic hepatic injury grade in predicting outcome for children after blunt abdominal trauma.

Authors:  David J Hackam; Douglas Potoka; Manuel Meza; Avrum Pollock; Mary Gardner; Peter Abrams; Jeffrey Upperman; Laura Schall; Henri Ford
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.545

6.  Non-operative management of blunt liver trauma: feasible and safe also in centres with a low trauma incidence.

Authors:  Gustav Norrman; Bobby Tingstedt; Mikael Ekelund; Roland Andersson
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.647

7.  High success with nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma: the liver is a sturdy organ.

Authors:  George C Velmahos; Konstantinos Toutouzas; Randall Radin; Linda Chan; Peter Rhee; Areti Tillou; Demetrios Demetriades
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2003-05

8.  Status of nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injuries in 1995: a multicenter experience with 404 patients.

Authors:  H L Pachter; M M Knudson; B Esrig; S Ross; D Hoyt; T Cogbill; H Sherman; T Scalea; P Harrison; S Shackford
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1996-01

Review 9.  Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma is the treatment of choice for hemodynamically stable patients. Results of a prospective trial.

Authors:  M A Croce; T C Fabian; P G Menke; L Waddle-Smith; G Minard; K A Kudsk; J H Patton; M J Schurr; F E Pritchard
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Blunt hepatic and splenic trauma in children: correlation of a CT injury severity scale with clinical outcome.

Authors:  L Ruess; C J Sivit; M R Eichelberger; G A Taylor; S J Bond
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  1995
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Acute aortic syndromes and aortic emergencies.

Authors:  Vinit Baliyan; Anushri Parakh; Anand M Prabhakar; Sandeep Hedgire
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.