Gastrointestinal Injuries in Blunt Abdominal Traumas.

AIM: To discuss the efficiency of RTS (Revised TraumaScore), ISS (Injury Severity Score), and factors that affect mortality and morbidity in gastrointestinal injuries due to blunt trauma.Method and methods: Patients with gastrointestinal injuries due to blunt trauma operated within the last six years have been studied retrospectively in terms of demographics,injury mechanism and localization, additional injuries, RTS and ISS, operative technique, morbidity, mortality and duration of hospitalization. FINDINGS: Of the eighteen cases, cause of injury was a traffic accident for 11 (61.1%), fall from height for 5 (27%) and physical attack for 2 (11%). Among the eighteen patients,there were 21 gastrointestinal injuries (11 intestinal, 6 colon,3 duodenum, 1 stomach). 10 (55.6%) had additional intraabdominal injuries while the number for extra-abdominal injuries were 12 (66.7%). Primary suture (10), segmentary resection (9) and pyloric exclusion (2) were the operations performed for the twenty-one gastrointestinal injuries.Although statistically not significant, 13(72.2%) patients with additional injuries compared with 5 (27.8%) patients with isolated gastrointestinal injuries, were found to have lower RTS (7.087/7.841), higher ISS (19.4/12.2), longer duration of hospitalization (11.5/8.4 day) as well as higher morbidity (7/1) and mortality (2/0) rates. Comparing the RTS (7.059/7.490) of patients who have and have not developed morbidity revealed no significant difference.However, ISS (23.9/12.2) was significantly higher in patients who have developed morbidity (p=0.003). RTS (6.085 7.445) and ISS (39.5/14.6) of patients who have survived were significantly different than patients who have not(p=0.037 and p=0.023, respectively) CONCLUSION: Additional injuries in patients with gastrointestinal injury due blunt abdominal traumas increases, although not significantly, morbidity, mortality and duration of hospitalization even when operated early. High ISS is significantly related to the risk of both morbidity and mortality while low RTS is significantly related only to the mortality risk.

Treatment of penetrating hepatic injuries: a retrospective analysis of 50 patients.

AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the possibility of non-operative treatment via retrospective analysis of our patients. METHODS: Fifty patients with penetrating hepatic injuries were examined retrospectively with respect to trauma scores, associated injuries, complications, and mortality parameters. RESULTS: Thirteen injuries were caused by firearms, whereas 37 injuries were caused by stab wounds. Forty-three patients (86%) underwent laparotomy and 7 patients (14%) were monitored by CT and clinical findings (nonoperative group, NO group). The laparotomies were evaluated as non-therapeutic in 11 patients (22%) (NTL group) and therapeutic in 32 patients (64%) (TL group). The morbidity and mortality rates were 40 and 10%, respectively. RTS and ISS scores of the nonsurviving and the surviving patients were significantly different. The rates of major venous, grade IV-V hepatic injuries, and gunshot wounds were significantly higher in the nonsurviving patients when compared to the surviving patients. CONCLUSION: Major venous and grade IV-V hepatic injuries were the primary factors determining mortality and these injuries generally occurred as a result of firearm injuries. NTL occurring at a rate of 22% would decrease to 2% if 'RTS <7' criteria was added to the hemodynamic instability and/or peritoneal irritation findings determining surgical candidacy.

Prognostic factors for survival in breast cancer patients who developed distant metastasis subsequent to definitive surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The present study was undertaken to define the prognostic factors for overall survival subsequent to definitive surgery, and for survival after the development of distant metastasis in breast cancer patients who developed distant metastasis subsequent to definitive surgery. METHODS: The records of 470 breast cancer patients with T1-3 tumours and distant metastasis following surgery were reviewed. Prognostic factors were compared to the first metastatic sites as solitary skeletal, multiple skeletal, and visceral metastases, and were analysed for overall survival following surgery and survival after metastasis. Survival curves were generated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate analysis was performed by the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: 79 patients (17 percent) had a solitary skeletal metastasis, 105 (22 percent) had multiple skeletal metastases, and 286 (61 percent) had a visceral metastasis. The five-year overall survival was significantly better for patients with a solitary bone metastasis (73 percent) compared to patients who had multiple bone metastases (46 percent), or a visceral metastasis (22 percent) (p-value is less than 0.0001). Pathological lymph node status 3, stage IIIC, grade 3, oestrogen receptor negativity, and visceral metastases were found to have independent detrimental influence on overall survival following surgery and survival after metastasis. A long-term metastasis-free interval affected post-metastatic outcome favourably. Radiotherapy improved overall survival. CONCLUSION: Pathological lymph node status, stage, grade, and oestrogen receptor status predicted survival after surgery as well as after the development of metastasis. Solitary bone metastasis has a more favourable prognosis than multiple bone metastases, and compared to visceral metastasis, skeletal metastasis has a more favourable prognosis.