Background: The pattern and presentation of penetrating abdominal trauma vary according to places and the structure of the present health system. As well controversies in management exist ranging from mandatory explor...Background: The pattern and presentation of penetrating abdominal trauma vary according to places and the structure of the present health system. As well controversies in management exist ranging from mandatory exploration to selective non-operative management. Objectives: To determine the pattern of penetrating abdominal trauma, current management practiced and outcome in Khartoum. Patients and Methods: The study was prospective, descriptive and hospital-based. It was carried out at the main three hospitals in Khartoum State. It was conducted over a period of one year from 2012 Mar to 2013 Mar. All patients who presented penetrating injury to their abdomen were included. Results: The study included 85 patients with a mean age of 28 years (SD ± 10). The male to female ratio was 11:1. Most of the patients (89.4%) were in the first four decades of their life. Twenty-three patients (27.1%) presented shock. Stab wound is the commonest mode of trauma seen in 83.5% of our patients. The majority of our patients were managed by exploratory laparotomy (81.2%), however 16 (18.8%) underwent conservative measures. Of the operated group, solid organ injuries were found in 22.9%, yet hollow viscous injuries were reported in 86.9% of the patients. Registrars operated on 78.26% of the patients. The rate of negative laparotomy of this study was 8.7%. Complications and mortality were encountered in 25.9% and 4.7% respectively. The mean hospital stay was 8.47 days (SD ± 10.6). Conclusion: This study demonstrates no difference in the pattern of intra-abdominal injuries. The rate of operative treatment is acceptable, but more laparotomies can be avoided if the haemodynamic stable patients without features of peritonitis were given a period of observation. The overall outcome was satisfactory.展开更多
文摘Background: The pattern and presentation of penetrating abdominal trauma vary according to places and the structure of the present health system. As well controversies in management exist ranging from mandatory exploration to selective non-operative management. Objectives: To determine the pattern of penetrating abdominal trauma, current management practiced and outcome in Khartoum. Patients and Methods: The study was prospective, descriptive and hospital-based. It was carried out at the main three hospitals in Khartoum State. It was conducted over a period of one year from 2012 Mar to 2013 Mar. All patients who presented penetrating injury to their abdomen were included. Results: The study included 85 patients with a mean age of 28 years (SD ± 10). The male to female ratio was 11:1. Most of the patients (89.4%) were in the first four decades of their life. Twenty-three patients (27.1%) presented shock. Stab wound is the commonest mode of trauma seen in 83.5% of our patients. The majority of our patients were managed by exploratory laparotomy (81.2%), however 16 (18.8%) underwent conservative measures. Of the operated group, solid organ injuries were found in 22.9%, yet hollow viscous injuries were reported in 86.9% of the patients. Registrars operated on 78.26% of the patients. The rate of negative laparotomy of this study was 8.7%. Complications and mortality were encountered in 25.9% and 4.7% respectively. The mean hospital stay was 8.47 days (SD ± 10.6). Conclusion: This study demonstrates no difference in the pattern of intra-abdominal injuries. The rate of operative treatment is acceptable, but more laparotomies can be avoided if the haemodynamic stable patients without features of peritonitis were given a period of observation. The overall outcome was satisfactory.
