Management of gastrointestinal perforation from blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma in children: analysis of 96 patients

Abstract

Aim

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic methods, concomitant organ injuries, factors affecting mortality and morbidity, treatment methods, and outcomes of patients treated for traumatic gastrointestinal (GI) perforation.

Materials and methods

We conducted a retrospective review of the medical records of 96 patients who had been treated for GI perforation between January 2000 and October 2015. Data were collected and organised according to the following categories: general patient information, age, gender, hospitalisation period, trauma mechanisms, concomitant injuries, radiological assessment, diagnosis and treatment methods, treatment forms, and complications. The cases were divided into two groups, blunt and penetrating traumas, and the patients within each group were compared. Colorectal trauma cases were not included in this study. Patients suspected of a GI perforation were assessed by standing plain abdominal radiograph (SPAR) and ultrasound scan (US). Patients who had a normal SPAR, and showed free or viscous fluid in the abdomen on US underwent computed tomography (CT) scanning. Surgery was performed if patients displayed free air in the abdomen on a SPAR or CT scan, showed viscous fluid without any additional injury, provided normal radiological images but displayed signs of peritonitis, or were clinically unstable. The patients were scored according to the Injury Severity Score (ISS) system.

Results

In total, 96 patients, with an average age of 10.3 ± 4 years (1–17 years) and diagnosed with a GI perforation, were reviewed retrospectively. The patients included 88 (91 %) males and 8 (9 %) females. The presence of free air on SPAR was detected in 42 (52 %) patients, whereas no free air was detected in 39 (48 %) patients. Non-specific significant findings were detected in 45 (76 %) out of 59 patients by USS, and in 78 % of patients by CT (viscous fluid, fluid, free air). The most affected organ was the ileum, which was detected in 37 (39 %) patients. Primary repair was performed on 71 (74 %) patients, while resection was performed on 22 (23 %); 3 (3 %) patients underwent an ostomy. Ten (10 %) patients experienced complications and five (5 %) patients died. The ISS scores for blunt and penetrating traumas were 14, 15 and no significant difference was detected between the scores (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Although the complication rate for patients with penetrating trauma was higher than for those with blunt trauma, the rate of mortality increased in patients with blunt trauma. Free air may not be detected by SPAR even if a GI perforation exists. Since diagnostic challenges may increase the rate of mortality and morbidity in GI perforations, we believe that a combination of radiological imaging and rapid abdominal examination is important in cases where SPAR cannot detect free air.