Gen Surg SAQs · trauma
Exsanguinating blunt polytrauma with liver and destructive colon injury — abbreviate, resuscitate, pack, time the return
Fellowship SAQ on damage control: DCS-versus-DCR definition with phases, admission predictor panel, PROPPR ratios and TXA windows, packing timing, colon stage-1 rules, traction closure hierarchy, SLEEP-TIME clock, matched open-abdomen harm and age-stratified outcomes.
On this page
Study tools
Target exams
Write your answer
Saved on this device. No marking — you are the marker.
Model answer
(A) Abbreviate by physiology, resuscitate by ratio and clock (4 marks). Damage control surgery is abbreviated laparotomy prioritising short-term physiological recovery over anatomical reconstruction — three steps (abbreviated operation, ICU restoration, planned definitive repair), extended to six phases with DCR as phase 0 — while DCR is hypotensive resuscitation with early blood products that may let borderline patients avoid DCS entirely.[3][5][1] He meets the damage-control admission panel: hypotension, tachycardia, positive FAST, lactate above 6, temperature below 35 — against independent early-mortality predictors of INR above 1.2, base deficit above 3, head AIS 3 or more, temperature below 35, lactate above 6 and haemoglobin below 7, from a cohort where 16.3 percent died early with lactate 5.81 versus 3.46 separating early deaths from survivors.[13] Run balanced products toward empiric 1:1:1 per EAST (protocol OR 0.61, high plasma OR 0.60, high platelets OR 0.44), accepting PROPPR's honesty — no mortality difference, fewer exsanguinations (9.2 versus 14.6 percent), more haemostasis (86 versus 78 percent).[25][24] Give TXA now as 1 g over 10 minutes then 1 g over 8 hours: within-1-hour treatment cut bleeding death (RR 0.68), 1-to-3-hour helped (RR 0.79), beyond 3 hours seemed harmful (RR 1.44) — with benefit concentrated inside 90 minutes to 2 hours.[26][27]
(B) Pack the liver, divert or delay the colon, close with traction (3 marks). Pack for coagulopathic liver bleeding — packing controlled 18 of 22 complex injuries definitively — and remove packs between 36 and 72 hours with first re-look after 48 hours: 24-hour removal rebled more than 48-hour, and under-36-hour removal rebled 21 versus 4 percent with equal complications.[42][40][41] For the destructive sigmoid injury, never anastomose at stage 1: delayed anastomosis at re-look leaked in 25 percent with significantly higher mortality when leak occurred, while diversion matched on overall and colon-related mortality — staple and leave discontinuous, divert or delay in the selected.[48] Close temporarily with vacuum plus fascial traction, not Bogotá bag: traction-plus-vacuum led vacuum alone by 35 points for definitive closure in the RCT-only meta-analysis, mesh-mediated traction closed 73 versus 54.9 percent and cut failed-closure odds ten-fold in Finland.[53][51][49]
(C) Return within 24 hours, close at the earliest honest moment, quote the harms (3 marks). Readiness is lactate normalisation (10 percent dead inside 24-hour normalisation, 67 percent when never normalised), but the closure odds decay per takeback: 92.9 percent fascial closure at 61 hours, minus 91.5 percent odds per extra re-laparotomy, first takeback within 24 hours — so return early and make the definitive operation definitive.[21][50] An open abdomen that could have been closed is a complication: matched peritonitis data showed more complications (71.2 versus 41.4 percent), higher mortality (22.5 versus 11.7 percent) and longer stay with open abdomen — with overnight and operator variation proving the decision is system-dependent.[65] Counsel by age honestly: over-55 damage-control mortality 29.4 versus 4.8 percent (laparotomy 55.6 versus 7.1) yet most elderly survived with comparable morbidity — intervene, do not presume futility.[68]
References19ShowHide
- [1]Weber DG, Bendinelli C, Balogh ZJ Damage control surgery for abdominal emergencies. Br J Surg, 2014.PMID 24273018
- [3]Lamb CM, MacGoey P, Navarro AP, et al. Damage control surgery in the era of damage control resuscitation. Br J Anaesth, 2014.PMID 25038156
- [5]Parreira JG, Soldá S, Rasslan S [Damage control: a tactical alternative for the management of exanguinating trauma patients]. Arq Gastroenterol, 2002.PMID 12778312
- [13]Frischknecht A, Lustenberger T, Bukur M, et al. Damage control in severely injured trauma patients - A ten-year experience. J Emerg Trauma Shock, 2011.PMID 22090736
- [21]Husain FA, Martin MJ, Mullenix PS, et al. Serum lactate and base deficit as predictors of mortality and morbidity. Am J Surg, 2003.PMID 12727572
- [24]Holcomb JB, Tilley BC, Baraniuk S, et al. Transfusion of plasma, platelets, and red blood cells in a 1:1:1 vs a 1:1:2 ratio and mortality in patients with severe trauma: the PROPPR randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 2015.PMID 25647203
- [25]Cannon JW, Khan MA, Raja AS, et al. Damage control resuscitation in patients with severe traumatic hemorrhage: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2017.PMID 28225743
- [26]Shakur H, Roberts I, Bautista R, et al. Effects of tranexamic acid on death, vascular occlusive events, and blood transfusion in trauma patients with significant haemorrhage (CRASH-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet, 2010.PMID 20554319
- [27]Roberts I, Shakur H, Afolabi A, et al. The importance of early treatment with tranexamic acid in bleeding trauma patients: an exploratory analysis of the CRASH-2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2011.PMID 21439633
- [40]Nicol AJ, Hommes M, Primrose R, et al. Packing for control of hemorrhage in major liver trauma. World J Surg, 2007.PMID 17334868
- [41]Caruso DM, Battistella FD, Owings JT, et al. Perihepatic packing of major liver injuries: complications and mortality. Arch Surg, 1999.PMID 10487590
- [42]Krige JE, Bornman PC, Terblanche J Therapeutic perihepatic packing in complex liver trauma. Br J Surg, 1992.PMID 1737272
- [48]Oosthuizen G, Buitendag J, Variawa S, et al. Penetrating colonic trauma and damage control surgery: Anastomosis or stoma? ANZ J Surg, 2021.PMID 34056835
- [49]Rasilainen S, Mentula P, Salminen P, et al. Superior primary fascial closure rate and lower mortality after open abdomen using negative pressure wound therapy with continuous fascial traction. J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2020.PMID 32701909
- [50]Kwon E, Krause C, Luo-Owen X, et al. Time is domain: factors affecting primary fascial closure after trauma and non-trauma damage control laparotomy (data from the EAST SLEEP-TIME multicenter registry). Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2022.PMID 34845499
- [51]Pillay P, Smith MTD, Bruce JL, et al. The Efficacy of VAMMFT Compared to 'Bogota Bag' in Achieving Sheath Closure Following Temporary Abdominal Closure at Index Laparotomy for Trauma. World J Surg, 2023.PMID 36995399
- [53]Cristaudo A, Jennings S, Gunnarsson R, et al. Complications and Mortality Associated with Temporary Abdominal Closure Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am Surg, 2017.PMID 28228207
- [65]Kao AM, Cetrulo LN, Baimas-George MR, et al. Outcomes of open abdomen versus primary closure following emergent laparotomy for suspected secondary peritonitis: A propensity-matched analysis. J Trauma Acute Care Surg, 2019.PMID 31045736
- [68]Lustenberger T, Talving P, Schnüriger B, et al. Impact of advanced age on outcomes following damage control interventions for trauma. World J Surg, 2012.PMID 22037692