Abstract
Background
Discontinuity of the bowel following intestinal injury and resection is a common practice in damage control procedures for severe abdominal trauma. However, there are concerns that complete occlusion of the bowel, especially in the presence of hypotension or edema that may result in ischemic bowel changes or increase bacterial or toxin translocation.
Methods
This was a retrospective study from three Level-1 trauma centers. Included were trauma patients who required bowel resection and damage control. The study population was stratified into two groups based on the management for bowel injury: bowel discontinuity versus primary anastomosis. Outcomes included anastomotic leak, organ space infection, bowel ischemia, and mortality.
Results
A total of 167 cases were included. In 84 cases, continuity of the bowel was established, and in 83, the bowel was left in discontinuity. The epidemiological, admission, and intraoperative physiological characteristics, the abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale, type of intra-abdominal injury, and transfusion requirements were similar in the two study groups. The mortality was 8.3 % in the continuity group and 16.9 % for the discontinuity group (p = 0.096). On the crude bivariate and adjusted regression analyses, there was a higher rate of bowel ischemia at the take-back operation in the discontinuity group (p = 0.003 for the crude and p = 0.034 for the adjusted). The organ space infection and anastomotic leak rate were not significantly different between the study groups.
Conclusions
Discontinuity of the bowel following damage control operation is associated with a higher risk of bowel ischemia than in patients with anastomosis. Further prospective observational and randomized studies are warranted.
Level of evidence
III.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Rotondo MF, Schwab CW, McGonigal MD et al (1993) “Damage control”: an approach for improved survival in exsanguinating penetrating abdominal injury. J Trauma 35(3):375–382 (discussion 382–3)
DuBose JJ, Scalea TM, Holcomb JB et al (2013) Open abdominal management after damage-control laparotomy for trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 74(1):113–122
Godat L, Kobayashi L, Costantini T, Coimbra R (2013) Abdominal damage control surgery and reconstruction: world society of emergency surgery position paper. World J Emerg Surg 8(1):53
Zanoni FL, Benabou S, Greco KV et al (2009) Mesenteric microcirculatory dysfunctions and translocation of indigenous bacteria in a rat model of strangulated small bowel obstruction. Clin (Sao Paulo) 64(9):911–919
Aldemir M, Kokoglu OF, Geyik MF, Buyukbayram H (2002) Effects of octreotide acetate and Saccharomyces boulardii on bacterial translocation in an experimental intestinal loop obstruction model of rats. Tohoku J Exp Med 198(1):1–9
Enochsson L, Nylander G, Ohman U (1982) Effects of intraluminal pressure on regional blood flow in obstructed and unobstructed small intestines in the rat. Am J Surg 144:558
Fischer PE, Nunn AM, Worman AB et al (2013) Vasopressor use after initial damage control laparotomy increases risk of anastomotic disruption in the management of destructive colon injuries. Am J Surg 206:900–903
Samel S, Keese M, Kleczka M et al (2002) Microscopy of bacterial translocation during small bowel obstruction and ischemia in vivo—a new animal model. BMC Surg 2:6
Bradley M, DuBose J, Scalea TM et al (2013) Independent predictors of enteric fistula and abdominal sepsis after damage control laparotomy: results from the prospective AAST Open Abdomen Registry. JAMA Surg 148:947–955
Deitch EA, Bridges WM, Ma JW et al (1990) Obstructed intestine as a reservoir for systemic infection. Am J Surg 159:394–401
Deitch EA (1989) Simple intestinal obstruction causes bacterial translocation in man. Arch Surg 124:699–701
Sagar PM, MacFie J, Sedman P et al (1995) Intestinal obstruction promotes gut translocation of bacteria. Dis Colon Rectum 38:640–644
Ji W, Ding W, Liu X, Kao X, Xu X, Li N, Li J (2014) Intraintestinal drainage as a damage control surgery adjunct in a hypothermic traumatic shock swine model with multiple bowel perforations. J Surg Res 192(1):170–176
Akçay MN, Capan MY, Gündogdu C, Polat M, Oren D (1996) Bacterial translocation in experimental intestinal obstruction. J Int Med Res 24(1):17–26
Roscher R, Oettinger W, Beger H (1988) Bacterial microflora, endogenous endotoxin, and prostaglandins in small bowel obstruction. Am J Surg 155:348–355
Ordoñez CA, Pino LF, Badiel M, Sánchez AI, Loaiza J, Ballestas L, Puyana JC (2011) Safety of performing a delayed anastomosis during damage control laparotomy in patients with destructive colon injuries. J Trauma 71(6):1512–1517
Burlew CC, Moore EE, Cuschieri J, Jurkovich GJ, Codner P (2011) Crowell KSew it up! A Western Trauma Association multi-institutional study of enteric injury management in the postinjury open abdomen. J Trauma 70(2):273–277
Kashuk JL, Cothren CC, Moore EE, Johnson JL, Biffl WL, Barnett CC (2009) Primary repair of civilian colon injuries is safe in the damage control scenario. Surgery. 146(4):663–668
Miller PR, Chang MC, Hoth JJ, Holmes JH 4th (2007) Meredith JW.Colonic resection in the setting of damage control laparotomy: is delayed anastomosis safe? Am Surg 73(6):606–609
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Talving, P., Chouliaras, K., Eastman, A. et al. Discontinuity of the Bowel Following Damage Control Operation Revisited: A Multi-institutional Study. World J Surg 41, 146–151 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3685-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3685-9