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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 267-296 |
| Number of pages | 30 |
| Journal | Surgical Clinics of North America |
| Volume | 71 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| State | Published - 1991 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
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 journal › Article
}
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
VL - 71
SP - 267
EP - 296
JO - Surgical Clinics of North America
JF - Surgical Clinics of North America
SN - 0039-6109
IS - 2
ER -