Literature DB >> 35023383

Anastomotic Outcomes in Military Exploratory Laparotomies in the Modern Combat Era.

Patrick F Walker1, Joseph D Bozzay1, David W Schechtman2, Faraz Shaikh2,3, Laveta Stewart2,3, M Leigh Carson2,3, David R Tribble2, Carlos J Rodriguez4, Matthew J Bradley1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intestinal anastomoses in military settings are performed in severely injured patients who often undergo damage control laparotomy in austere environments. We describe anastomotic outcomes of patients from recent wars.
METHODS: Military personnel with combat-related intra-abdominal injuries (June 2009-December 2014) requiring laparotomy with resection and anastomosis were analyzed. Patients were evacuated from Iraq or Afghanistan to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (Germany) before being transferred to participating U.S. military hospitals.
RESULTS: Among 341 patients who underwent 1053 laparotomies, 87 (25.5%) required ≥1 anastomosis. Stapled anastomosis only was performed in 57.5% of patients, while hand-sewn only was performed in 14.9%, and 9.2% had both stapled and hand-sewn techniques (type unknown for 18.4%). Anastomotic failure occurred in 15% of patients. Those with anastomotic failure required more anastomoses (median 2 anastomoses, interquartile range [IQR] 1-3 vs. 1 anastomosis, IQR 1-2, P = .03) and more total laparotomies (median 5 laparotomies, IQR 3-12 vs. 3, IQR 2-4, P = .01). There were no leaks in patients that had only hand-sewn anastomoses, though a significant difference was not seen with those who had stapled anastomoses. While there was an increasing trend regarding surgical site infections (SSIs) with anastomotic failure after excluding superficial SSIs, it was not significant. There was no difference in mortality. DISCUSSION: Military trauma patients have a similar anastomotic failure rate to civilian trauma patients. Patients with anastomotic failure were more likely to have had more anastomoses and more total laparotomies. No definitive conclusions can be drawn about anastomotic outcome differences between hand-sewn and stapled techniques.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anastomotic failure; anastomotic technique; laparotomy; military

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35023383      PMCID: PMC8930422          DOI: 10.1177/00031348211050281

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Surg        ISSN: 0003-1348            Impact factor:   0.688


  17 in total

1.  The Effect of a Golden Hour Policy on the Morbidity and Mortality of Combat Casualties.

Authors:  Russ S Kotwal; Jeffrey T Howard; Jean A Orman; Bruce W Tarpey; Jeffrey A Bailey; Howard R Champion; Robert L Mabry; John B Holcomb; Kirby R Gross
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  Nontherapeutic laparotomy in American combat casualties: a 10-year review.

Authors:  Thomas A Mitchell; Tara Hutchison; Tyson E Becker; James K Aden; Lorne Blackbourne; Christopher E White
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.313

3.  After the Battlefield: Infectious Complications among Wounded Warriors in the Trauma Infectious Disease Outcomes Study.

Authors:  David R Tribble; Clinton K Murray; Bradley A Lloyd; Anuradha Ganesan; Katrin Mende; Dana M Blyth; Joseph L Petfield; Jay McDonald
Journal:  Mil Med       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 1.437

4.  Incisional hernia incidence following laparotomy for combat trauma: Investigating 15 years of US war surgery.

Authors:  Victor Moas; Susan Eskridge; Mary Clouser; Steven Kurapaty; Christopher Dyke; Jason Souza
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 3.313

5.  Handsewn versus stapled anastomosis in penetrating colon injuries requiring resection: a multicenter study.

Authors:  Demetrios Demetriades; James A Murray; Linda S Chan; C Ordoñez; D Bowley; Kimberly K Nagy; Edward E Cornwell; George C Velmahos; N Muñoz; C Hatzitheofilou; C William Schwab; Aurelio Rodriguez; C Cornejo; Kimberly A Davis; Nicholas Namias; David H Wisner; Rao R Ivatury; Ernest E Moore; Jose A Acosta; Kimball I Maull; Michael H Thomason; David A Spain
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2002-01

Review 6.  Infection-associated clinical outcomes in hospitalized medical evacuees after traumatic injury: trauma infectious disease outcome study.

Authors:  David R Tribble; Nicholas G Conger; Susan Fraser; Todd D Gleeson; Ken Wilkins; Tanya Antonille; Amy Weintrob; Anuradha Ganesan; Lakisha J Gaskins; Ping Li; Greg Grandits; Michael L Landrum; Duane R Hospenthal; Eugene V Millar; Lorne H Blackbourne; James R Dunne; David Craft; Katrin Mende; Glenn W Wortmann; Rachel Herlihy; Jay McDonald; Clinton K Murray
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2011-07

7.  Trauma system development in a theater of war: Experiences from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

Authors:  Brian J Eastridge; Donald Jenkins; Stephen Flaherty; Henry Schiller; John B Holcomb
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2006-12

8.  Abdominal trauma surgery during recent US combat operations from 2002 to 2016.

Authors:  Zsolt T Stockinger; Caryn A Turner; Jennifer M Gurney
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.313

9.  Colon and rectal injuries during Operation Iraqi Freedom: are there any changing trends in management or outcome?

Authors:  Scott R Steele; Kate E Wolcott; Philip S Mullenix; Matthew J Martin; James A Sebesta; Kenneth S Azarow; Alec C Beekley
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  Outcomes of Exploratory Laparotomy and Abdominal Infections Among Combat Casualties.

Authors:  Joseph D Bozzay; Patrick F Walker; David W Schechtman; Faraz Shaikh; Laveta Stewart; David R Tribble; Matthew J Bradley
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2020-08-29       Impact factor: 2.192

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.