The role of clinical and sonographic assessments in pre-operative evaluation of patients with splenic injuries in a resource-limited economy.

Background: Splenic trauma has been recognized as the most common cause of preventable deaths amongst trauma patients. Due to paucity of modern diagnostic imaging facilities in our setting, determination of the error rates and role of the simple, available diagnostic approaches are worthwhile and relevant to the practice of general surgery. Objectives: The aim was to determine the role and diagnostic accuracy of clinical and sonographic assessments of splenic injuries. Methods: This was a prospective study of the value of pre-operative clinical and sonographic assessments of patients with splenic injuries in our setting. Results: A total of 111 patients with abdominal trauma were evaluated. Of these, splenic injuries were confirmed in 75 patients intra-operatively, mainly from blunt trauma. Of the 97 cases diagnosed by clinical method, 66(68.0%) were confirmed by intraoperative findings. Similarly, of 86 sonographic diagnoses of splenic injuries, 61 (70.9%) truly had splenic trauma. Sensitivity for sonographic and clinical assessments was 84.7% and 78.9% respectively. False positive and negative rates for clinical (27.3% versus 44.1%) and ultrasonographic (29.1% versus 40.0%) assessments were high. Conclusions: Majority of splenic injuries were due to blunt abdominal trauma. The two diagnostic methods showed high sensitivity, but performed poorly for other validity tests.

Anterior abdominal wall reconstruction with mesh implants: indications and limitations in a developing tropical economy.

INTRODUCTION: the role of surgery in managing massive midline abdominal wall defects has continued to rise, leading to higher demand for more effective techniques in order to limit recurrences. There is paucity of data on this subject in Southeast Nigeria. The aim of this study is to document the indications and challenges of treatment of complex, midline abdominal wall defects in our centre. METHODS: this was a cross-sectional study of adult patients with complex, midline abdominal wall defects managed with mesh implants over a five-year period. RESULTS: a total of 182 adult patients, predominantly females 160(87.9%), received mesh implants for complex abdominal wall defects. The common indications were incisional hernia 128(70.3%), abdominal wound dehiscence 16(8.8%) and divarication of recti 16(8.8%). About one-third 62(34.1%) of the patients required additional abdominoplasty procedure. Delay towards prompt surgical repair was noted in 168(92.3%) patients, notably due to financial constraints 32(17.6%) followed by comorbidities requiring serial assessments 24(13.2%). Superficial wound infection rate was 5.5% while deep (mesh) infection was noted in two (1.1%) patients. Recurrence and perioperative mortality rates were 1.1% and 1.6% respectively. Diabetes mellitus in obese female patients was an independent predictor of perioperative death (p=0.000). CONCLUSION: the most common indication for abdominal wall reconstruction in our environment is incisional hernia. The use of prosthetic meshes to repair complex abdominal wall defects is largely safe and effective in our practice, but timely reconstruction is commonly hampered by multi-faceted economic, clinical and pathological barriers.