Colonic resection in trauma

Colostomy versus anastomosis

James A. Murray, Demetrios Demetriades, Michelle Colson, Zhenkai Song, George C. Velmahos, Edward E. Cornwell, Juan A. Asensio, Howard Belzberg, Thomas V. Berne

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

60 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The management of colonic trauma is well established for simple injuries with primary repair, and ileocolostomy for right-sided injuries that undergo colonic resection. Segmental colon resection for injuries to the left colon can be managed with either an end colostomy or primary anastomosis. A retrospective review was performed to evaluate the outcome and complications associated with colonic resection for trauma to determine the risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. Methods: A retrospective review included patients undergoing colonic resection for trauma. The patients were stratified into colostomy, ileocolostomy, and colocolostomy groups. Patient demographics and colon-related complications were collected. Comparison between the colostomy and colocolostomy groups was performed to determine the difference in outcome. The outcome of right-sided colon injuries managed by either an ileocolonic or colocolonic anastomosis was compared. Analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leakage. Results: One hundred forty patients over a 66-month period were included in the analysis. Overall, 41% (57 of 140) of patients developed a colon-related complication; 28% (39 of 140) of patients developed an abscess. Overall, the anastomotic leak rate was 13% (7 of 56) in the colocolostomy group, 4% (2 of 56) in the ileocolostomy group. Right-sided colon injuries managed with a colocolonic anastomosis had a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage than ileocolonic anastomosis, i.e., 14 versus 4% respectively. Of the seven patients who developed a leak from a colocolonic anastomosis, two patients died (29%). Univariate analysis identified an Abdominal Trauma Index Score ≥25 (p = 0.03) or hypotension in the emergency department (p = 0.001) to be associated with increased risk of developing an anastomotic leak from a colocolonic anastomosis. Conclusion: Colonic injuries that are managed with resection are associated with a high complication rate regardless of whether an anastomosis or colostomy is performed. Colonic resection and anastomosis can be performed safely in the majority of patients with severe colonic injury, including injuries to the left colon. For injuries of the right colon, an ileocolostomy has a lower incidence of leakage than a colocolonic anastomosis. For injuries to the left colon, there remains a role for colostomy specifically in the subgroups of patients with a high ATI or hypotension, because these patients are at greater risk for an anastomotic leak. The role of resection and primary anastomosis versus colostomy in colonic trauma requires further investigation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)250-254
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care
Volume46
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Colostomy
Wounds and Injuries
Anastomotic Leak
Colon
Hypotension
Incidence
Abscess

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Murray, J. A., Demetriades, D., Colson, M., Song, Z., Velmahos, G. C., Cornwell, E. E., ... Berne, T. V. (1999). Colonic resection in trauma: Colostomy versus anastomosis. Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care, 46(2), 250-254.

Colonic resection in trauma : Colostomy versus anastomosis. / Murray, James A.; Demetriades, Demetrios; Colson, Michelle; Song, Zhenkai; Velmahos, George C.; Cornwell, Edward E.; Asensio, Juan A.; Belzberg, Howard; Berne, Thomas V.

In: Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care, Vol. 46, No. 2, 02.1999, p. 250-254.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Murray, JA, Demetriades, D, Colson, M, Song, Z, Velmahos, GC, Cornwell, EE, Asensio, JA, Belzberg, H & Berne, TV 1999, 'Colonic resection in trauma: Colostomy versus anastomosis', Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 250-254.
Murray JA, Demetriades D, Colson M, Song Z, Velmahos GC, Cornwell EE et al. Colonic resection in trauma: Colostomy versus anastomosis. Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care. 1999 Feb;46(2):250-254.
Murray, James A. ; Demetriades, Demetrios ; Colson, Michelle ; Song, Zhenkai ; Velmahos, George C. ; Cornwell, Edward E. ; Asensio, Juan A. ; Belzberg, Howard ; Berne, Thomas V. / Colonic resection in trauma : Colostomy versus anastomosis. In: Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care. 1999 ; Vol. 46, No. 2. pp. 250-254.
@article{0f9480db4ba24fa7a6aa7133604a7979,
title = "Colonic resection in trauma: Colostomy versus anastomosis",
abstract = "Objectives: The management of colonic trauma is well established for simple injuries with primary repair, and ileocolostomy for right-sided injuries that undergo colonic resection. Segmental colon resection for injuries to the left colon can be managed with either an end colostomy or primary anastomosis. A retrospective review was performed to evaluate the outcome and complications associated with colonic resection for trauma to determine the risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. Methods: A retrospective review included patients undergoing colonic resection for trauma. The patients were stratified into colostomy, ileocolostomy, and colocolostomy groups. Patient demographics and colon-related complications were collected. Comparison between the colostomy and colocolostomy groups was performed to determine the difference in outcome. The outcome of right-sided colon injuries managed by either an ileocolonic or colocolonic anastomosis was compared. Analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leakage. Results: One hundred forty patients over a 66-month period were included in the analysis. Overall, 41{\%} (57 of 140) of patients developed a colon-related complication; 28{\%} (39 of 140) of patients developed an abscess. Overall, the anastomotic leak rate was 13{\%} (7 of 56) in the colocolostomy group, 4{\%} (2 of 56) in the ileocolostomy group. Right-sided colon injuries managed with a colocolonic anastomosis had a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage than ileocolonic anastomosis, i.e., 14 versus 4{\%} respectively. Of the seven patients who developed a leak from a colocolonic anastomosis, two patients died (29{\%}). Univariate analysis identified an Abdominal Trauma Index Score ≥25 (p = 0.03) or hypotension in the emergency department (p = 0.001) to be associated with increased risk of developing an anastomotic leak from a colocolonic anastomosis. Conclusion: Colonic injuries that are managed with resection are associated with a high complication rate regardless of whether an anastomosis or colostomy is performed. Colonic resection and anastomosis can be performed safely in the majority of patients with severe colonic injury, including injuries to the left colon. For injuries of the right colon, an ileocolostomy has a lower incidence of leakage than a colocolonic anastomosis. For injuries to the left colon, there remains a role for colostomy specifically in the subgroups of patients with a high ATI or hypotension, because these patients are at greater risk for an anastomotic leak. The role of resection and primary anastomosis versus colostomy in colonic trauma requires further investigation.",
author = "Murray, {James A.} and Demetrios Demetriades and Michelle Colson and Zhenkai Song and Velmahos, {George C.} and Cornwell, {Edward E.} and Asensio, {Juan A.} and Howard Belzberg and Berne, {Thomas V.}",
year = "1999",
month = "2",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "250--254",
journal = "Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery",
issn = "2163-0755",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Colonic resection in trauma

T2 - Colostomy versus anastomosis

AU - Murray, James A.

AU - Demetriades, Demetrios

AU - Colson, Michelle

AU - Song, Zhenkai

AU - Velmahos, George C.

AU - Cornwell, Edward E.

AU - Asensio, Juan A.

AU - Belzberg, Howard

AU - Berne, Thomas V.

PY - 1999/2

Y1 - 1999/2

N2 - Objectives: The management of colonic trauma is well established for simple injuries with primary repair, and ileocolostomy for right-sided injuries that undergo colonic resection. Segmental colon resection for injuries to the left colon can be managed with either an end colostomy or primary anastomosis. A retrospective review was performed to evaluate the outcome and complications associated with colonic resection for trauma to determine the risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. Methods: A retrospective review included patients undergoing colonic resection for trauma. The patients were stratified into colostomy, ileocolostomy, and colocolostomy groups. Patient demographics and colon-related complications were collected. Comparison between the colostomy and colocolostomy groups was performed to determine the difference in outcome. The outcome of right-sided colon injuries managed by either an ileocolonic or colocolonic anastomosis was compared. Analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leakage. Results: One hundred forty patients over a 66-month period were included in the analysis. Overall, 41% (57 of 140) of patients developed a colon-related complication; 28% (39 of 140) of patients developed an abscess. Overall, the anastomotic leak rate was 13% (7 of 56) in the colocolostomy group, 4% (2 of 56) in the ileocolostomy group. Right-sided colon injuries managed with a colocolonic anastomosis had a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage than ileocolonic anastomosis, i.e., 14 versus 4% respectively. Of the seven patients who developed a leak from a colocolonic anastomosis, two patients died (29%). Univariate analysis identified an Abdominal Trauma Index Score ≥25 (p = 0.03) or hypotension in the emergency department (p = 0.001) to be associated with increased risk of developing an anastomotic leak from a colocolonic anastomosis. Conclusion: Colonic injuries that are managed with resection are associated with a high complication rate regardless of whether an anastomosis or colostomy is performed. Colonic resection and anastomosis can be performed safely in the majority of patients with severe colonic injury, including injuries to the left colon. For injuries of the right colon, an ileocolostomy has a lower incidence of leakage than a colocolonic anastomosis. For injuries to the left colon, there remains a role for colostomy specifically in the subgroups of patients with a high ATI or hypotension, because these patients are at greater risk for an anastomotic leak. The role of resection and primary anastomosis versus colostomy in colonic trauma requires further investigation.

AB - Objectives: The management of colonic trauma is well established for simple injuries with primary repair, and ileocolostomy for right-sided injuries that undergo colonic resection. Segmental colon resection for injuries to the left colon can be managed with either an end colostomy or primary anastomosis. A retrospective review was performed to evaluate the outcome and complications associated with colonic resection for trauma to determine the risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. Methods: A retrospective review included patients undergoing colonic resection for trauma. The patients were stratified into colostomy, ileocolostomy, and colocolostomy groups. Patient demographics and colon-related complications were collected. Comparison between the colostomy and colocolostomy groups was performed to determine the difference in outcome. The outcome of right-sided colon injuries managed by either an ileocolonic or colocolonic anastomosis was compared. Analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leakage. Results: One hundred forty patients over a 66-month period were included in the analysis. Overall, 41% (57 of 140) of patients developed a colon-related complication; 28% (39 of 140) of patients developed an abscess. Overall, the anastomotic leak rate was 13% (7 of 56) in the colocolostomy group, 4% (2 of 56) in the ileocolostomy group. Right-sided colon injuries managed with a colocolonic anastomosis had a higher incidence of anastomotic leakage than ileocolonic anastomosis, i.e., 14 versus 4% respectively. Of the seven patients who developed a leak from a colocolonic anastomosis, two patients died (29%). Univariate analysis identified an Abdominal Trauma Index Score ≥25 (p = 0.03) or hypotension in the emergency department (p = 0.001) to be associated with increased risk of developing an anastomotic leak from a colocolonic anastomosis. Conclusion: Colonic injuries that are managed with resection are associated with a high complication rate regardless of whether an anastomosis or colostomy is performed. Colonic resection and anastomosis can be performed safely in the majority of patients with severe colonic injury, including injuries to the left colon. For injuries of the right colon, an ileocolostomy has a lower incidence of leakage than a colocolonic anastomosis. For injuries to the left colon, there remains a role for colostomy specifically in the subgroups of patients with a high ATI or hypotension, because these patients are at greater risk for an anastomotic leak. The role of resection and primary anastomosis versus colostomy in colonic trauma requires further investigation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033037778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033037778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 250

EP - 254

JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

SN - 2163-0755

IS - 2

ER -