Negative laparotomy in patients with abdominal penetrating injuries (APIs) is associated with deleterious outcomes and unnecessary expense; however, the indications for laparotomy in hemodynamically stable patients with ambiguous computed tomography (CT) findings remain unclear. This study aimed to identify the factors associated with negative laparotomy. findings

Data of patients who underwent laparotomy for APIs between 2011 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who presented with definite indications for laparotomy were excluded. The patients were dichotomized into negative and positive laparotomy groups, and the baseline characteristics, laboratory test results, and CT findings were compared between the groups.

Of 55 patients with ambiguous CT findings, 38 and 17 patients were assigned to the negative and positive laparotomy groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to the baseline characteristics or the nature of the ambiguous CT findings. However, the laboratory test results showed that there was a difference in the percentage of neutrophils between the groups (negative: 55.6% [range 47.4–66.1%] vs. positive: 79.8% [range 77.6–88.2%], p<0.001), although the total white blood cell count was not significantly different. The mean duration of hospital stay for the negative laparotomy group was 13.1 days, and seven patients (18.4%) experienced complications.

Diagnostic factors definitively indicative of laparotomy were not identified, although the percentage of neutrophils might be helpful. However, routine laparotomy in patients with peritoneal injuries could result in instances of negative laparotomy.

Laparoscopy has various advantages over laparotomy in terms of postoperative recovery. The number of surgeons using laparoscopy as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in abdominal trauma patients is increasing, whereas open conversion is becoming less common. This report summarizes a single surgeon’s experience of laparoscopy at a level I trauma center and evaluates the feasibility of laparoscopy as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool for abdominal trauma patients.

In total, 30 abdominal trauma patients underwent laparoscopy by a single surgeon from October 2014 to May 2020. The purpose of laparoscopy was categorized as diagnostic or therapeutic. Patients were classified into three groups by type of surgery: total laparoscopic surgery (TLS), laparoscopy-assisted surgery (LAS), or open conversion (OC). Univariate analysis was performed to determine the advantages and disadvantages.

The mechanism of injury was blunt in 19 (63.3%) and penetrating in 11 patients (36.7%). Eleven (36.7%) and 19 patients (63.3%) underwent diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy, respectively. The hospital stay was shorter for patients who underwent diagnostic laparoscopy than for those who underwent therapeutic laparoscopy (5.0 days vs. 13.0 days), but no other surgical outcomes differed between the groups. TLS, LAS, and OC were performed in 12 (52.2%), eight (34.8%), and three patients (13.0%), respectively. There was no significant difference in morbidity and mortality among the three groups.

Laparoscopic surgery for selected cases of abdominal trauma may be feasible and safe as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in hemodynamically stable patients due to the low OC rate and the absence of fatal morbidity and mortality.

Damage control laparotomy has contributed to improved survival rates for severe abdominal injuries. A large part of severe abdominal injury occurs with a concomitant pelvic bone fracture. The safety and effectiveness of internal fixation of pelvic bone fracture(s) has not been established. The aim of the present study was to evaluate infection risk in the pelvic surgical site in patients who underwent emergent abdominal surgery.

This single-center retrospective observational study was based on data collected from a prospectively maintained registry between January 2015 and June 2019. Patients who underwent laparotomy and pelvic internal fixation were included. Individuals <18 and ≥80 years of age, those with no microbiological investigations, and those who underwent one-stage abdominal surgery were excluded. Comprehensive statistical comparative analysis was not performed due to the small number of enrolled patients.

A total of six patients met the inclusion criteria, and the most common injury mechanism was anterior-posterior compression (67%). The average duration of open abdomen was 98 hours (range, 44–198), and the time interval between abdominal closure and pelvic surgery was 98 hours. One patient (16.7%) died due to multi-organ dysfunction syndrome. Micro-organisms were identified in the abdominal surgical site in five patients (83%), with no micro-organisms in pelvic surgical sites. There was no unplanned implant removal.

Internal fixation of pelvic bone fracture(s) could be performed in the state of open abdomen, and the advantages of early fixation may countervail the risks for cross contamination.