Literature DB >> 9301607

Prevention of abdominal compartment syndrome by absorbable mesh prosthesis closure.

J C Mayberry1, R J Mullins, R A Crass, D D Trunkey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether prevention of the abdominal compartment syndrome after celiotomy for trauma justifies the use of absorbable mesh prosthesis closure in severely injured patients.
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of case series from July 1, 1989, to July 31, 1996.
SETTING: University-based level I trauma center. PATIENTS: Seventy-three consecutive trauma patients requiring celiotomy who received absorbable mesh prosthesis closure and 73 control patients matched for injury severity and trauma type who received celiotomy without a mesh prosthesis closure.
INTERVENTIONS: Absorbable mesh prosthesis closure was used in cases of excessive fascial tension, abdominal compartment syndrome, necrotizing fasciitis, traumatic defect, or planned reoperation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographics, Injury Severity Score, Abdominal Trauma Index, highest abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale score, number of abdominal/pelvic injuries, highest head Abbreviated Injury Scale score, shock, indication for mesh closure, complications, number of operations and time required for closure, days in the intensive care unit, length of stay, and mortality were determined. The highest abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale score was multiplied by the number of abdominal/pelvic injuries to calculate the abdominal pelvic trauma score.
RESULTS: Group 1 consisted of 47 patients who received mesh at initial celiotomy, and group 2, 26 patients who received mesh at a subsequent celiotomy. These 2 groups were statistically similar in demographics, injury severity, and mortality. However, group 2 had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative abdominal compartment syndrome (35% vs 0%), necrotizing fasciitis (39% vs 0%), intra-abdominal abscess/peritonitis (35% vs 4%), and enterocutaneous fistula (23% vs 11%) compared with group 1 (P < .001). Group 1 patients with preoperative abdominal compartment syndrome had more abdominal/ pelvic injuries and higher abdominal trauma index than matched controls (P < .05). There was a trend toward higher abdominal pelvic trauma score in patients who developed abdominal compartment syndrome. The Pearson coefficient of correlation between the abdominal trauma index and the more easily calculated abdominal pelvic trauma score was 0.91 (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: The use of absorbable mesh prosthesis closure in severely injured patients undergoing celiotomy was effective in treating and preventing the abdominal compartment syndrome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9301607     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1997.01430330023003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  16 in total

1.  Intra-abdominal vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) after necrosectomy for acute necrotising pancreatitis: preliminary experience.

Authors:  D Sermoneta; M Di Mugno; P L Spada; C Lodoli; M E Carvelli; S C Magalini; C Cavicchioni; M G Bocci; F Martorelli; M G Brizi; D Gui
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Vacuum-assisted closure of postoperative abdominal wounds: a prospective study.

Authors:  Sriram Subramonia; Sarah Pankhurst; Brian J Rowlands; Dileep N Lobo
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  Topical negative pressure wound therapy: a review of its role and guidelines for its use in the management of acute wounds.

Authors:  Estas Bovill; Paul E Banwell; Luc Teot; Elof Eriksson; Colin Song; Jim Mahoney; Ronny Gustafsson; Raymund Horch; Anand Deva; Ian Whitworth
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2008-09-19       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Modified Opsite sandwich for temporary abdominal closure: a non-traumatic experience.

Authors:  J M Wilde; M A Loudon
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.891

5.  Prospective evaluation of vacuum-assisted fascial closure after open abdomen: planned ventral hernia rate is substantially reduced.

Authors:  Preston R Miller; J Wayne Meredith; James C Johnson; Michael C Chang
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  Vacuum-assisted closure of laparostomy wounds: a critical review of the literature.

Authors:  Philip Stevens
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.315

7.  Staged management of giant abdominal wall defects: acute and long-term results.

Authors:  T Wright Jernigan; Timothy C Fabian; Martin A Croce; Natalie Moore; F Elizabeth Pritchard; Gayle Minard; Tiffany K Bee
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 8.  Options for closure of the infected abdomen.

Authors:  Kristin C Turza; Chris A Campbell; Laura H Rosenberger; Amani D Politano; Stephen W Davies; Lin M Riccio; Robert G Sawyer
Journal:  Surg Infect (Larchmt)       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 2.150

9.  Gastrointestinal function in intensive care patients: terminology, definitions and management. Recommendations of the ESICM Working Group on Abdominal Problems.

Authors:  Annika Reintam Blaser; Manu L N G Malbrain; Joel Starkopf; Sonja Fruhwald; Stephan M Jakob; Jan De Waele; Jan-Peter Braun; Martijn Poeze; Claudia Spies
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Abdominal compartment syndrome - Intra-abdominal hypertension: Defining, diagnosing, and managing.

Authors:  Theodossis S Papavramidis; Athanasios D Marinis; Ioannis Pliakos; Isaak Kesisoglou; Nicki Papavramidou
Journal:  J Emerg Trauma Shock       Date:  2011-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.