Management of penetrating neck injuries: The controversy surrounding zone II injuries

Juan A. Asensio, C. P. Valenziano, R. E. Falcone, J. D. Grosh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

109 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Penetrating neck injuries present a difficult challenge in management, given the unique anatomy of the neck. Controversy surrounds the approach to zone II injuries: mandatory versus selective exploration. On the basis of an extensive literature review, the authors conclude that neither approach is obviously superior. A selective approach is safe in the asymptomatic and hemodynamically stable patient, provided that accurate invasive diagnostic means are immediately available. The mandatory approach is safe, reliable, and time tested. The greatest problem appears to be the accuracy of detection of cervical esophageal injuries: Radiologic evaluation may be inaccurate, rigid esophagoscopy carries a risk of perforation, and the injury may easily be overlooked during surgical exploration.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)267-296
Number of pages30
JournalSurgical Clinics of North America
Volume71
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1991
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Neck Injuries
Wounds and Injuries
Esophagoscopy
Anatomy
Neck

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Management of penetrating neck injuries : The controversy surrounding zone II injuries. / Asensio, Juan A.; Valenziano, C. P.; Falcone, R. E.; Grosh, J. D.

In: Surgical Clinics of North America, Vol. 71, No. 2, 1991, p. 267-296.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Asensio, Juan A. ; Valenziano, C. P. ; Falcone, R. E. ; Grosh, J. D. / Management of penetrating neck injuries : The controversy surrounding zone II injuries. In: Surgical Clinics of North America. 1991 ; Vol. 71, No. 2. pp. 267-296.
@article{73834855d6c54eb6b8c4781e56b736a6,
title = "Management of penetrating neck injuries: The controversy surrounding zone II injuries",
abstract = "Penetrating neck injuries present a difficult challenge in management, given the unique anatomy of the neck. Controversy surrounds the approach to zone II injuries: mandatory versus selective exploration. On the basis of an extensive literature review, the authors conclude that neither approach is obviously superior. A selective approach is safe in the asymptomatic and hemodynamically stable patient, provided that accurate invasive diagnostic means are immediately available. The mandatory approach is safe, reliable, and time tested. The greatest problem appears to be the accuracy of detection of cervical esophageal injuries: Radiologic evaluation may be inaccurate, rigid esophagoscopy carries a risk of perforation, and the injury may easily be overlooked during surgical exploration.",
author = "Asensio, {Juan A.} and Valenziano, {C. P.} and Falcone, {R. E.} and Grosh, {J. D.}",
year = "1991",
language = "English",
volume = "71",
pages = "267--296",
journal = "Surgical Clinics of North America",
issn = "0039-6109",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Management of penetrating neck injuries

T2 - The controversy surrounding zone II injuries

AU - Asensio, Juan A.

AU - Valenziano, C. P.

AU - Falcone, R. E.

AU - Grosh, J. D.

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - Penetrating neck injuries present a difficult challenge in management, given the unique anatomy of the neck. Controversy surrounds the approach to zone II injuries: mandatory versus selective exploration. On the basis of an extensive literature review, the authors conclude that neither approach is obviously superior. A selective approach is safe in the asymptomatic and hemodynamically stable patient, provided that accurate invasive diagnostic means are immediately available. The mandatory approach is safe, reliable, and time tested. The greatest problem appears to be the accuracy of detection of cervical esophageal injuries: Radiologic evaluation may be inaccurate, rigid esophagoscopy carries a risk of perforation, and the injury may easily be overlooked during surgical exploration.

AB - Penetrating neck injuries present a difficult challenge in management, given the unique anatomy of the neck. Controversy surrounds the approach to zone II injuries: mandatory versus selective exploration. On the basis of an extensive literature review, the authors conclude that neither approach is obviously superior. A selective approach is safe in the asymptomatic and hemodynamically stable patient, provided that accurate invasive diagnostic means are immediately available. The mandatory approach is safe, reliable, and time tested. The greatest problem appears to be the accuracy of detection of cervical esophageal injuries: Radiologic evaluation may be inaccurate, rigid esophagoscopy carries a risk of perforation, and the injury may easily be overlooked during surgical exploration.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026021919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026021919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2003250

AN - SCOPUS:0026021919

VL - 71

SP - 267

EP - 296

JO - Surgical Clinics of North America

JF - Surgical Clinics of North America

SN - 0039-6109

IS - 2

ER -