摘要
BACKGROUND The management of high-grade pancreatic trauma is controversial.AIM To review our single-institution experience on the surgical management of blunt and penetrating pancreatic injuries.METHODS A retrospective review of records was performed on all patients undergoing surgical intervention for high-grade pancreatic injuries [American Association for the Surgery of Trauma(AAST) Grade Ⅲor greater] at the Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney between January 2001 and December 2022. Morbidity and mortality outcomes were reviewed, and major diagnostic and operative challenges were identified.RESULTS Over a twenty-year period, 14 patients underwent pancreatic resection for highgrade injuries. Seven patients sustained AAST Grade Ⅲinjuries and 7 were classified as Grades Ⅳ or Ⅴ. Nine underwent distal pancreatectomy and 5 underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD). Overall, there was a predominance of blunt aetiologies(11/14). Concomitant intra-abdominal injuries were observed in 11 patients and traumatic haemorrhage in 6 patients. Three patients developed clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas and there was one in-hospital mortality secondary to multi-organ failure. Among stable presentations, pancreatic ductal injuries were missed in two-thirds of cases(7/12) on initial computed tomography imaging and subsequently diagnosed on repeat imaging or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. All patients who sustained complex pancreaticoduodenal trauma underwent PD without mortality. The management of pancreatic trauma is evolving. Our experience provides valuable and locally relevant insights into future management strategies.CONCLUSION We advocate that high-grade pancreatic trauma should be managed in high-volume hepatopancreato-biliary specialty surgical units. Pancreatic resections including PD may be indicated and safely performed with appropriate specialist surgical, gastroenterology, and interventional radiology support in tertiary centres.
基金
Research protocol was approved by the Northern Sydney Local Health District ethics committee as a negligible/Low risk project.This study was not a trial or animal study.
