4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Blunt intraabdominal arterial injury in pediatric trauma patients: injury distribution and markers of outcome

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 916-923

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.12.039

关键词

blunt trauma; vascular injury; NTDB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The epidemiology of pediatric blunt intraabdominal arterial injury is ill defined. We analyzed a multiinstitutional trauma database to better define injury patterns and predictors of outcome. Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Trauma Database was evaluated for all patients younger than 16 years with blunt intraabdominal arterial injury from 2000 to 2004. Injury distribution, operative treatment, and variables associated with mortality were considered. Results: One hundred twelve intraabdominal arterial injuries were identified in 103 pediatric blunt trauma patients. Single arterial injury (92.2%) occurred most frequently: renal (36.9%), mesenteric (24.3%), and iliac (23.3%). Associated injuries were present in 96.1% of patients (abdominal visceral, 75.7%; major extraabdominal skeletal/visceral, 77.7%). Arterial control was obtained operatively (n = 46, 44.7%) or by endovascular means (n = 6, 5.8%) in 52 patients. Overall mortality was 15.5%. Increased mortality was associated with multiple arterial injuries (P = .049), intraabdominal venous injury (P = .011), head injury (P = .05), Glasgow Coma Score less than 8 (P < .001), cardiac arrest (P < .001), profound base deficit (P = .007), and poor performance on multiple injured outcomes scoring systems (Revised Trauma Score [P < .001], Injury Severity Score [P = .001], and TRISS [P = .002]). Conclusion: Blunt intraabdominal arterial injury in children usually affects a single vessel. Associated injuries appear to be nearly universal. The high mortality rate is influenced by serious associated injuries and is reflected by overall injury severity scores. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据