Management of liver injuries: predictors for the need of operation and damage control surgery
Supparerk Prichayudh1, Chayatat Sirinawin1, Suvit Sriussadaporn1
1Chulalongkorn University, Surgery, Rama4 rd, Bangkok, Thailand.
Unlabelled:
Management of liver injuries: Predictors for the need of operation and damage control surgery,
Introduction:
The advancement in the management of liver injuries, including the use of non-operative management (NOM), damage control surgery (DCS) and angiographic embolisation (AE); has resulted, in improvement of outcomes. The aim of this study is to analyse the outcome of liver injury patients in our institution and to identify predictors for the need of operative management (OM) and DCS.
Patients And Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 218 patients with liver injury admitted to King, Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital from May 2002 to May 2011. Data collection included demographic, data, emergency department parameters, detail of liver injuries, and outcome in terms of mortality rate (MR). Stepwise logistic regression was performed to identify mutually independent predictors for the need of OM and DCS.
Results:
Two hundred and eighteen patients with liver injury were identified (156 blunt and 62 penetrating). One hundred fifty-four patients (70.6%) underwent OM due to hemodynamic instability, (96), peritonitis (24), and other indications (34). DCS (perihepatic packing and temporary abdominal, closure) was utilised in 45 patients. NOM was attempted in 64 patients (29.4%), 6 of these, subsequently required laparotomy (success rate 90.6%). Angiography was performed in 47 patients, (14 in NOM, 33 in OM) and 40 patients received AE (10 in NOM, 30 in OM). Overall MR was 17.4%, the, MR was significantly higher in OM than in NOM (24 vs. 1.6%; p<0.001, OR 19.92). The mutually independent predictors for the need of operation were low Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), penetrating mechanism, tachycardia, and hypotension; while the independent predictors for DCS were high grade (>4) liver injury, tachycardia, and blunt mechanism.
Conclusions:
Overall MR of liver injury patients was 17.4%. NOM carried a low MR and should be, attempted in the absence of hemodynamic instability and peritonitis. Patients with low GCS, penetrating injury, tachycardia, and hypotension were more likely to require operation. DCS should be considered while operating on patients with high grade liver injury, tachycardia, and blunt mechanism.
Related Concept Videos
Esophageal Varices-II: Clinical Features and Management
In the initial assessment, a thorough review of the patient's medical history is vital to identify risk factors such as liver disease, alcohol...
Liver Regeneration
Cells of Liver
The liver comprises four major types of cells— hepatocytes, stellate, Kupffer, and sinusoidal endothelial cells. The hepatocytes are...
Kidney Transplant II: Surgical Procedure


