Conference Coverage

It may be time to rethink damage-control laparotomy

 

Key clinical point: Definitive laparotomy for abdominal trauma added little risk of complications but shortened ventilator and ICU days.

Major finding: Definitive closure was associated with a 72% chance of more ventilator- and hospital-free days and a 77% chance of more ICU-free days than damage-control closure.

Study details: The Bayseian analysis comprised 39 definitive and 39 damage-control laparotomy patients.

Disclosures: Neither Dr. Harvin nor Dr. Rhee had any financial disclosures.

Source: Harvin J et al. AAST 2018, Oral paper 12.


 

AT THE AAST ANNUAL MEETING

– A definitive laparotomy isn’t much more clinically costly than a damage-control procedure, but it can cost fewer resources: fewer days in intensive care, fewer days on a ventilator, and a shorter overall length of stay.

Dr. John Harvin

Dr. John Harvin

Among damage-control abdominal trauma cases that could have been closed, definitive laparotomy (DEF) was associated with a 56% probability of major abdominal complications – very close to the probability associated with damage-control closure, John Harvin, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Definitive closure was also associated with about a 72% chance of more ventilator- and hospital-free days and a 77% chance of more ICU-free days than damage-control closure, said Dr. Harvin of the University of Texas, Austin.

“Our analysis tells us that there’s a minimal chance of reducing complications with a definitive laparotomy, compared to leaving them open, but this also comes with more than a 70% chance of having a shorter hospital staying and getting off the ventilator faster.”

The data from a 2-year quality review process reaffirms what trauma surgeons have been seeing, and reporting, since damage-control closure became more popular in the past decade, said Peter Rhee, MD, commenting on the study.

Dr. Peter Rhee Michele Sullivan/MDedge News

Dr. Peter Rhee

“There are three congregations in this faith of damage-control laparotomy,” said Dr. Rhee, a surgeon in Atlanta, Ga. “The first believes it should be the default for all these types of operations and that being preemptive is better than anything. The second believes that it doesn’t hurt the patient too much, and that it can be done when absolutely needed to save a life. The third belief is that there’s minimal data to support it, that it should rarely be used, and that it’s always costly. We all know that the pendulum of damage-control laparotomy is finally swinging back to the center.”

The study arose from an effort at the Red Duke Trauma Institute, Austin, Tex., to reduce its rate of damage-control laparotomy (DCL). Surgeons examined all emergent trauma laparotomies conducted from 2013 to 2015. They discussed each case and compared morbidity and mortality rates to a published control group. This work was published last year in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

By adopting this review procedure, the hospital was able to decrease its 39% DCL rate to 23% over 2 years (an absolute reduction of 68 cases) without any change in infection rates, fascial dehiscence, unplanned reoperation, or mortality. The improvements continued, Dr. Harvin noted, with a farther 17% reduction in DCL after the project concluded.

Dr. Harvin’s analysis looked at 44 of these procedures which, according to the adjudication panel, could have been managed by DEF. Each was matched to a DEF case, and the outcomes were calculated with a Bayesian statistical model.

The primary outcome was major abdominal complication, a composite measure of fascial dehiscence, organ or space surgical-site infection, reopening of fascia, and enteric suture line failure. Secondary outcomes were days off the ventilator and out of the ICU and hospital.

Of the 872 patients in the study, most (639; 73%) were managed by DEF; the rest (209; 24%) were managed by DCL. Of these, the panel agreed that 44 (22%) could have been safely closed at the time of surgery and survived at least 5 days. The propensity-matching scheme comprised 39 of these cases matched with 39 DEF cases.

Most were male (74%); the mean age was 38 years. Penetrating injuries were most common (54%). The abdominal Abbreviated Injury Score was 3. The mean Injury Severity Score was 22 in the DEF cases and 25 in the DCL cases, but this was not a significant difference. There were no differences in blood pressure at presentation or at the end of the surgery, no differences in blood transfusion needs, and no differences in body temperature.

A major abdominal complication occurred in 31% of the DEF cases and 21% of the DCL cases, a relative risk of 0.99. This amounted to a 56% posterior probability of a complication associated with DEF.

Comparing DCL cases with DEF cases, the mean number of hospital-free days was 15 vs.13; ICU-free days, 26 vs. 21; and ventilator-free days, 29 vs. 26. These differences amount to a 72% chance that DEL would result in more hospital-free days and more ventilator-free days, and a 77% chance that DEL would result in more ICU-free days.

The numbers underscore the need to rethink DCL for abdominal trauma, Dr. Rhee said.

“I too once believed in this procedure and used to do it all the time. After 2 decades, we now know that it contributed to the frozen bellies, abdominal wound hernias, fascial dehiscence, missed complications, and to the never-ending enteroatmospheric fistulas. If we want to reduce fistulas, we must first reduce damage-control laparotomy. Nurses will love you for not creating the narcotic-addicted, total parenteral nutrition–dependent patient with a fragrant open belly and a fistula.”

Neither Dr. Harvin nor Dr Rhee had any relevant financial disclosures.

SOURCE: Harvin L et al. AAST 2018, Oral paper 12.

Next Article: