RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The recent mandate for surgical exploration for all penetrating abdominal trauma has been questioned. High-volume centers report good outcomes for non-operative treatment in penetrating trauma for hemodynamically stable patients without peritonitis and with tangential wounds. The applicability of this strategy in smaller hospitals is unknown. STUDY OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate non-operative management of penetrating abdominal trauma at a Level II trauma center. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with penetrating abdominal trauma from 2006 through 2008. Demographic information, treatments, and outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 86 patients with penetrating abdominal trauma; 12 (14%) had documented peritoneal violation and were managed non-operatively. The average age was 30 years (range 21-39 years), with 50% African American, 33% Caucasian, and 17% Hispanic. Male patients accounted for 92%, and the average Injury Severity Score was 5.2 (range 1-13). Overall non-operative treatment failed in 3 patients (25%); one required drainage of a retrogastric abscess on hospital day 4, and another underwent gastric and diaphragm repair on hospital day 1. The third treatment failure did not require an operation but developed a biloma requiring percutaneous drainage. There were no other complications related to non-operative therapy and no mortalities. The average length of stay was 3.9 days; 83% of patients were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: In hemodynamically stable patients without peritonitis and documented isolated injuries to solid organs, non-operative management of penetrating abdominal trauma seems safe; however, it can delay diagnosis of hollow viscus injuries. Until further data emerge, extreme caution should be used in employing non-operative management for penetrating abdominal injuries at small trauma centers.
