首页> 外文期刊>The journal of trauma and acute care surgery >Analysis of over 2 decades of colon injuries identifies optimal method of diversion: Does an end justify the means?
【24h】

Analysis of over 2 decades of colon injuries identifies optimal method of diversion: Does an end justify the means?

机译:分析超过2年的结肠伤害识别最佳转移方法:最终是否合理呢?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION Conflicting evidence exists regarding the definitive management of destructive colon injuries. Although diversion with an end ostomy can theoretically decrease initial complications, it mandates a more extensive reversal procedure. Conversely, anastomosis with proximal loop ostomy diversion, while simplifying the reversal, increases the number of suture lines and potential initial morbidity. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of diversion technique on morbidity and mortality in patients with destructive colon injuries. METHODS Consecutive patients with destructive colon injuries managed with diversion from 1996 to 2016 were stratified by demographics, severity of shock and injury, operative management, and timing of reversal. Outcomes, including ostomy complications (obstruction, ischemia, readmission) and reversal complications (obstruction, abscess, suture line failure, fascial dehiscence), were compared between patients managed with a loop versus end colostomy. Patients with rectal injuries and who died within 24 hours were excluded. RESULTS A total of 115 patients were identified: 80 with end colostomy and 35 with loop ostomy. Ostomy complications occurred in 22 patients (19%), and 11 patients (10%) suffered reversal complications. There was no difference in ostomy-related (2.9% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.99) mortality. For patients without a planned ventral hernia (PVH), there was no difference in ostomy complications between patients managed with a loop versus end colostomy (12% vs. 18%, p = 0.72). However, patients managed with a loop ostomy had a shorter reversal operative time (95 vs. 245 minutes, p = 0.002) and reversal length of stay (6 vs. 10, p = 0.03) with fewer reversal complications (0% vs. 36%, p = 0.02). For patients with a PVH, there was no difference in outcomes between patients managed with a loop versus end colostomy. CONCLUSION For patients without PVH, anastomosis with proximal loop ostomy reduced reversal-related complications, operative time, LOS, and hospital charges without compromising initial morbidity. Therefore, loop ostomy should be the preferred method of diversion, if required, following destructive colon injur
机译:引言有关破坏性结肠损伤的最终管理存在相互矛盾的证据。虽然具有结束骨跖的转移可以从理论上降低初始并发症,但它授权更广泛的逆转程序。相反,具有近端环路造口术转移的吻合术,同时简化了逆转,增加了缝合线的数量和潜在的初始发病率。因此,本研究的目的是评估导流技术对破坏性结肠损伤患者的发病率和死亡率的影响。方法采用1996年至2016年转移管理的连续患者因分类,人口统计,休克和伤害严重程度,手术管理和逆转时间分类。结果,在用循环与最终光凝术治疗的患者之间比较了结果,包括造口术并发症(梗阻,缺血,即入症)和逆转并发症(梗阻,脓肿,缝合线失败,鉴状性裂开)。直肠损伤患者和24小时内死亡的患者被排除在外。结果共鉴定了115名患者:80患者,末端光凝术和35例,环形造口术。造口术并发症发生在22例(19%)和11名患者(10%)遭受的逆转并发症中发生。骨术相关的差异(2.9%对3.8%,P = 0.99)死亡率。对于没有计划腹膜疝(PVH)的患者,患者与环形光凝术治疗的患者之间的骨术并发症没有差异(12%对18%,P = 0.72)。然而,用环骨术治疗的患者具有较短的逆转操作时间(95 vs.245分钟,p = 0.002),并且具有较少的反转并发症(0%与36)的逆转的逗留程度(6 vs.10,p = 0.03)(0% %,p = 0.02)。对于PVH的患者,用循环与终点术治疗的患者之间的结果没有差异。结论对没有PVH的患者,吻合术患者近端环路造口术减少了逆转相关的并发症,操作时间,洛杉矶和医院费用,而不会影响初始发病率。因此,在破坏性结肠伤害之后,环路骨跖应该是改进的优选方法

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号