Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy: Se\psis vs haemorrhage

Naeem Goussous, Donald H. Jenkins, Martin D. Zielinski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) for intra-abdominal sepsis vs intra abdominal haemorrhage. We hypothesize that patients undergoing DCL for sepsis will have a higher rate of septic complications and a lower rate of primary fascial closure. Settings and patients: Retrospective study of patients undergoing DCL from December 2006 to November 2009. Data are presented as medians and percentages where appropriate. Results: 111 patients were identified (55 men), 79 with sepsis and 32 with haemorrhage. There was no difference in age (63 vs 62 years), body mass index (BMI, 27 vs 28), diabetes mellitus (13% vs 9%), or duration of initial operation (125 vs 117 min). Patients with sepsis presented with a lower serum lactate (2.2 vs 4.7 mmol/L, p < 0.01), base deficit (4.0 vs 8.0, p ≤ 0.01) and ASA score (3.0 vs 4.0, p < 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall morbidity (81% vs 66), mortality (19% vs 22%), intra-abdominal abscess (18% vs 16%), deep wound infection (9% vs 9%), enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) (8% vs 6%) and primary fascial closure (58% vs 59%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that intra-abdominal abscess (OR 4.26, 95% CI 1.06-19.32), higher base deficit (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.31) and more abdominal explorations (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-2.07) were associated with lack of primary fascial closure, but BMI (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.07), ECF (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.23-19.98), wound infection (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.15-5.27), amount of crystalloids infused within the first 24 h (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and intra-abdominal sepsis (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.35-3.80) were not. Conclusions: There was an equivalent rate of septic complications and primary fascial closure rates regardless of cause for DCL. Intra-abdominal abscess, worse base deficit and higher number of abdominal explorations were independently associated with the lack of primary fascial closure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)151-155
Number of pages5
JournalInjury
Volume45
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2014

Fingerprint

Laparotomy
Sepsis
Hemorrhage
Abdominal Abscess
Intestinal Fistula
Wound Infection
Lactic Acid
Diabetes Mellitus
Body Mass Index
Retrospective Studies
Morbidity
Mortality
Serum

Keywords

  • Damage control laparotomy
  • Haemorrhage
  • Intra abdominal abscess
  • Primary fascial closure
  • Sepsis
  • Temporary abdominal closure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy : Se\psis vs haemorrhage. / Goussous, Naeem; Jenkins, Donald H.; Zielinski, Martin D.

In: Injury, Vol. 45, No. 1, 01.2014, p. 151-155.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Goussous, Naeem ; Jenkins, Donald H. ; Zielinski, Martin D. / Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy : Se\psis vs haemorrhage. In: Injury. 2014 ; Vol. 45, No. 1. pp. 151-155.
@article{dde521aa721c4b2db6bd146198c6da2e,
title = "Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy: Se\psis vs haemorrhage",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) for intra-abdominal sepsis vs intra abdominal haemorrhage. We hypothesize that patients undergoing DCL for sepsis will have a higher rate of septic complications and a lower rate of primary fascial closure. Settings and patients: Retrospective study of patients undergoing DCL from December 2006 to November 2009. Data are presented as medians and percentages where appropriate. Results: 111 patients were identified (55 men), 79 with sepsis and 32 with haemorrhage. There was no difference in age (63 vs 62 years), body mass index (BMI, 27 vs 28), diabetes mellitus (13{\%} vs 9{\%}), or duration of initial operation (125 vs 117 min). Patients with sepsis presented with a lower serum lactate (2.2 vs 4.7 mmol/L, p < 0.01), base deficit (4.0 vs 8.0, p ≤ 0.01) and ASA score (3.0 vs 4.0, p < 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall morbidity (81{\%} vs 66), mortality (19{\%} vs 22{\%}), intra-abdominal abscess (18{\%} vs 16{\%}), deep wound infection (9{\%} vs 9{\%}), enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) (8{\%} vs 6{\%}) and primary fascial closure (58{\%} vs 59{\%}). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that intra-abdominal abscess (OR 4.26, 95{\%} CI 1.06-19.32), higher base deficit (OR 1.14, 95{\%} CI 1.00-1.31) and more abdominal explorations (OR 1.54, 95{\%} CI 1.23-2.07) were associated with lack of primary fascial closure, but BMI (OR 1.00, 95{\%} CI 0.94-1.07), ECF (OR 2.02, 95{\%} CI 0.23-19.98), wound infection (OR 0.93, 95{\%} CI 0.15-5.27), amount of crystalloids infused within the first 24 h (OR 1.00, 95{\%} CI 0.99-1.00) and intra-abdominal sepsis (OR 1.14, 95{\%} CI 0.35-3.80) were not. Conclusions: There was an equivalent rate of septic complications and primary fascial closure rates regardless of cause for DCL. Intra-abdominal abscess, worse base deficit and higher number of abdominal explorations were independently associated with the lack of primary fascial closure.",
keywords = "Damage control laparotomy, Haemorrhage, Intra abdominal abscess, Primary fascial closure, Sepsis, Temporary abdominal closure",
author = "Naeem Goussous and Jenkins, {Donald H.} and Zielinski, {Martin D.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.injury.2013.01.039",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "151--155",
journal = "Injury",
issn = "0020-1383",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Primary fascial closure after damage control laparotomy

T2 - Se\psis vs haemorrhage

AU - Goussous, Naeem

AU - Jenkins, Donald H.

AU - Zielinski, Martin D.

PY - 2014/1

Y1 - 2014/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) for intra-abdominal sepsis vs intra abdominal haemorrhage. We hypothesize that patients undergoing DCL for sepsis will have a higher rate of septic complications and a lower rate of primary fascial closure. Settings and patients: Retrospective study of patients undergoing DCL from December 2006 to November 2009. Data are presented as medians and percentages where appropriate. Results: 111 patients were identified (55 men), 79 with sepsis and 32 with haemorrhage. There was no difference in age (63 vs 62 years), body mass index (BMI, 27 vs 28), diabetes mellitus (13% vs 9%), or duration of initial operation (125 vs 117 min). Patients with sepsis presented with a lower serum lactate (2.2 vs 4.7 mmol/L, p < 0.01), base deficit (4.0 vs 8.0, p ≤ 0.01) and ASA score (3.0 vs 4.0, p < 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall morbidity (81% vs 66), mortality (19% vs 22%), intra-abdominal abscess (18% vs 16%), deep wound infection (9% vs 9%), enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) (8% vs 6%) and primary fascial closure (58% vs 59%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that intra-abdominal abscess (OR 4.26, 95% CI 1.06-19.32), higher base deficit (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.31) and more abdominal explorations (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-2.07) were associated with lack of primary fascial closure, but BMI (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.07), ECF (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.23-19.98), wound infection (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.15-5.27), amount of crystalloids infused within the first 24 h (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and intra-abdominal sepsis (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.35-3.80) were not. Conclusions: There was an equivalent rate of septic complications and primary fascial closure rates regardless of cause for DCL. Intra-abdominal abscess, worse base deficit and higher number of abdominal explorations were independently associated with the lack of primary fascial closure.

AB - Objective: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing damage control laparotomy (DCL) for intra-abdominal sepsis vs intra abdominal haemorrhage. We hypothesize that patients undergoing DCL for sepsis will have a higher rate of septic complications and a lower rate of primary fascial closure. Settings and patients: Retrospective study of patients undergoing DCL from December 2006 to November 2009. Data are presented as medians and percentages where appropriate. Results: 111 patients were identified (55 men), 79 with sepsis and 32 with haemorrhage. There was no difference in age (63 vs 62 years), body mass index (BMI, 27 vs 28), diabetes mellitus (13% vs 9%), or duration of initial operation (125 vs 117 min). Patients with sepsis presented with a lower serum lactate (2.2 vs 4.7 mmol/L, p < 0.01), base deficit (4.0 vs 8.0, p ≤ 0.01) and ASA score (3.0 vs 4.0, p < 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall morbidity (81% vs 66), mortality (19% vs 22%), intra-abdominal abscess (18% vs 16%), deep wound infection (9% vs 9%), enterocutaneous fistula (ECF) (8% vs 6%) and primary fascial closure (58% vs 59%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that intra-abdominal abscess (OR 4.26, 95% CI 1.06-19.32), higher base deficit (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.31) and more abdominal explorations (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.23-2.07) were associated with lack of primary fascial closure, but BMI (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.07), ECF (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.23-19.98), wound infection (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.15-5.27), amount of crystalloids infused within the first 24 h (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and intra-abdominal sepsis (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.35-3.80) were not. Conclusions: There was an equivalent rate of septic complications and primary fascial closure rates regardless of cause for DCL. Intra-abdominal abscess, worse base deficit and higher number of abdominal explorations were independently associated with the lack of primary fascial closure.

KW - Damage control laparotomy

KW - Haemorrhage

KW - Intra abdominal abscess

KW - Primary fascial closure

KW - Sepsis

KW - Temporary abdominal closure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84889085464&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84889085464&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.injury.2013.01.039

DO - 10.1016/j.injury.2013.01.039

M3 - Article

C2 - 23453268

AN - SCOPUS:84889085464

VL - 45

SP - 151

EP - 155

JO - Injury

JF - Injury

SN - 0020-1383

IS - 1

ER -