• Title/Summary/Keyword: Injury severity score (ISS)

Search Result 123, Processing Time 0.026 seconds

Management of Patients with Traumatic Rupture of the Diaphragm

  • Hwang, Sang-Won;Kim, Han-Yong;Byun, Jung-Hun
    • Journal of Chest Surgery
    • /
    • v.44 no.5
    • /
    • pp.348-354
    • /
    • 2011
  • Background: Traumatic rupture of the diaphragm is an unusual type of trauma. In addition, it is difficult to diagnose because it can be accompanied by injuries to other organs. If it is not detected early, the mortality rate can increase due to serious complications. Diaphragmatic rupture is an important indicator of the severity of the trauma. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors affecting the incidence of complications and mortality in patients who had surgery to treat traumatic rupture of the diaphragm. Materials and Methods: The subjects were patients who had undergone a diaphragmatic rupture by blunt trauma or stab wounds except patients who were transferred to other hospitals within 3 days of hospitalization, from January 2000 to December 2007. This study was a retrospective study. 43 patients were hospitalized, and 40 patients were included during the study period. Among them, 28 were male, 12 were female, and the average age was 42 (from 18 to 80). Outcome predictive factors including hypoxia, ventilator application days, revised trauma score (RTS), injury severity score (ISS), age, herniated organs, complications, and the mortality rate were investigated. Results: Causes of trauma included motor vehicle crashes for 20 patients (50%), falls for 10 (25%), stab wounds for 8 (20%), and agricultural machinery accidents for 2 (5%). Most of the patients (36 patients; 90%) had wound sites on the left. Diagnosis was performed within 12 hours for most patients. The diaphragmatic rupture was diagnosed preoperatively in 27 patients (70%) and in 12 patients (30%) during other surgeries. For surgical treatment, thoracotomy was performed in 14 patients (35%), laparotomy in 11 (27.5%), and a surgery combining thoracotomy and laparotomy in 15 patients (37.5%). Herniated organs in the thoracic cavity included the stomach for 23 patients (57.5%), the omentum for 15 patients (37.5%), the colon for 10 patients (25%), and the spleen for 6 patients (15%). Accompanying surgeries included splenectomy for 13 patients (32.5%), lung suture for 6 patients (15%), and liver suture for 5 patients (12.5%). The average hospital stay was $47.80{\pm}56.72$ days, and the period of ventilation was $3.90{\pm}5.8$ days. The average ISS was $35.90{\pm}16.81$ (11~75), and the average RTS was $6.46{\pm}1.88$ (1.02~7.84). The mortality rate was 17.5% (7 patients). Factors affecting complications were stomach hernia and age. Factors affecting the mortality rate were ISS and RTS. Conclusion: There are no typical symptoms of the traumatic rupture of the diaphragm by blunt trauma. Nor are there any special methods of diagnosis; in fact, it is difficult to diagnose because it accompanies injuries to other organs. Stab wounds are also not easy to diagnose, though they are relatively easy to diagnose compared to blunt trauma because the accompanying injuries are more limited. Suture of the diaphragm can be performed through the chest, the abdomen, or the thoracoabdomen. These surgical methods are chosen based on accompanying organ injuries. When there are many organ injuries, there are a great number of complications. Significant factors affecting the complication rate were stomach hernia and age. ISS and RTS were significant as factors affecting the mortality rate. In the case of severe trauma such as pelvic fractures, frequent physical examinations and chest X-rays are necessary to confirm traumatic rupture of the diaphragm because it does not have specific symptoms, and there are no clear diagnosis methods. Complications and the mortality rate should be reduced with early diagnosis and with treatment by confirming diaphragmatic rupture in the thoracic cavity and the abdomen during surgery.

Correlation between Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter Measured by Computed Tomography and Elevated Intracranial Pressure in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury

  • Lim, Tae Kyoo;Yu, Byug Chul;Ma, Dae Sung;Lee, Gil Jae;Lee, Min A;Hyun, Sung Yeol;Jeon, Yang Bin;Choi, Kang Kook
    • Journal of Trauma and Injury
    • /
    • v.30 no.4
    • /
    • pp.140-144
    • /
    • 2017
  • Purpose: The optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) measured by ultrasonography is among the indicators of intracranial pressure (ICP) elevation. However, whether ONSD measurement is useful for initial treatment remains controversial. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between ONSD measured by computed tomography (CT) and ICP in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: A total of 246 patients with severe trauma from January 1, 2015 until December 31, 2015 were included in the study. A total of 179 patients with brain damage with potential for ICP elevation were included in the TBI group. The remaining 67 patients comprised the non-TBI group. A comparison was made between the two groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the accuracy of ONSD when used as a screening test for the TBI group including those with TBI with midline shift (with elevated ICP). Results: The mean injury severity score (ISS) and glasgow coma scale (GCS) of all patients were $24.2{\pm}6.1$ and $5.4{\pm}0.8$, respectively. The mean ONSD of the TBI group ($5.5{\pm}1.0mm$) was higher than that of the non-TBI group ($4.7{\pm}0.6mm$). Some significant differences in age ($55.3{\pm}18.1$ vs. $49.0{\pm}14.8$, p<0.001), GCS ($11.7{\pm}4.1$ versus $13.3{\pm}3.0$, p<0.001), and ONSD ($5.5{\pm}1.0$ vs. $4.7{\pm}0.6$, p<0.001) were observed between the TBI and the non-TBI group. An ROC analysis was used to assess the correlation between TBI and ONSD. Results showed an area under the ROC curve (AUC) value of 0.752. The same analysis was used in the TBI with midline shift group, which showed an AUC of 0.912. Conclusions: An ONSD of >5.5 mm, measured on CT, is a good indicator of ICP elevation. However, since an ONSD is not sensitive enough to detect an increased ICP, it should only be used as one of the parameters in detecting ICP along with other screening tests.

PARK Index for Preventable Major Trauma Death Rate (중증외상환자에서 TRISS를 활용한 예방가능 중증외상사망률 지표: PARK Index)

  • Park, Chan Yong;Yu, Byungchul;Kim, Ho Hyun;Hwang, Jung Joo;Lee, Jungnam;Cho, Hyun Min;Park, Han Na
    • Journal of Trauma and Injury
    • /
    • v.28 no.3
    • /
    • pp.115-122
    • /
    • 2015
  • Purpose: To calculate Preventable Trauma Death Rate (PTDR), Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) is the most utilized evaluation index of the trauma centers in South Korea. However, this method may have greater variation due to the small number of the denominator in each trauma center. Therefore, we would like to develop new indicators that can be used easily on quality improvement activities by increasing the denominator. Methods: The medical records of 1005 major trauma (ISS >15) patients who visited 2 regional trauma center (A center and B center) in 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. PTDR and PARK Index (Preventable Major Trauma Death Rate, PMTDR) were calculated in 731 patients with inclusion criteria. We invented PARK Index to minimize the variation of preventability of trauma death. In PTDR the denominator is all number of deaths, and in PARK Index the denominator is number of all patients who have survival probability (Ps) larger than 0.25. Numerator is the number of deaths from patients who have Ps larger than 0.25. Results: The size of denominator was 40 in A center, 49 in B center, and overall 89 in PTDR. The size of denominator was significantly increased, and 287 (7.2-fold) in A center, 422 (8.6-fold) in B center, and overall 709 (8.0-fold) in PARK Index. PARK Index was 12.9% in A center, 8.3% in B center, and overall 10.2%. Conclusion: PARK Index is calculated as a rate of mortality from all major trauma patients who have Ps larger than 0.25. PARK Index obtain an effect that denominator is increased 8.0-fold than PTDR. Therefore PARK Index is able to compensate for greater disadvantage of PTDR. PARK Index is expected to be helpful in implementing evaluation of mortality outcome and to be a new index that can be applied to a trauma center quality improvement activity.

  • PDF