Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication

Ayman El-Menyar, Husham Abdelrahman, Hassan Al-Thani, Ahmad Zarour, Ashok Parchani, Ruben Peralta, Rifat - Latifi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The mechanism and outcome of traumatic abdominal injury (TAI) varies worldwide. Moreover, data comparing TAIs in each abdominal compartment are lacking. We aimed to assess from the academic point of view, TAI based on its anatomical compartments. Patients & methods: We conducted a retrospective study for TAI patients between 2008 and 2011 in Qatar. Patients were categorized according to the involved anatomical compartment (C): intrathoracic (ITC), retroperitoneal (RPC), true abdomen (TAC), and pelvic abdomen (PAC) group. Chi Square test, One-Way ANOVA and multivariate regression analysis were appropriately performed. Results: Of 6,888 patients admitted to the trauma unit, 1,036 (15%) had TAI that were grouped as ITC (65%), RPC (15%), TAC (13%), and PAC (7%). The mean age was lowest in ITC (29 ± 13) and highest in TAC (34 ± 11) group, (P = 0.001). Motor vehicle crash was the main mechanism of injury in all groups except for PAC, in which fall dominated. Vast majority of expatriates had PAC and TAC injuries. The main abdominal injuries included liver (35%; ITC), spleen (32%; ITC) and kidneys (18%; RPC). Extra-abdominal injuries involved the head in RPC and ITC, lung in ITC and RPC and extremities in PAC. Mean ISS was higher in RPC and ITC. Abdominal AIS was higher in TAC injuries. Overall hospital mortality was 10%: RPC (15%), TAC (11%), ITC (9.4%) and PAC (1.5%). Concurrent traumatic brain injury (OR 5.3; P = 0.001) and need for blood transfusion (OR 3.03; P = 0.003) were the main independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion: In addition to its academic value, the anatomical approach of TAI would be a complementary tool for better understanding and prediction of the pattern and outcome of TAI. This would be possible if further research find accurate, early diagnostic tool for this anatomical classification.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-8
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Trauma Management and Outcomes
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Sep 15 2014

Fingerprint

Abdominal Injuries
Abdomen
Wounds and Injuries
Qatar
Trauma Centers
Motor Vehicles
Chi-Square Distribution
Hospital Mortality
Blood Transfusion
Analysis of Variance
Spleen
Multivariate Analysis
Extremities
Retrospective Studies
Head
Regression Analysis
Kidney
Lung
Mortality
Liver

Keywords

  • Abdominal injury
  • Anatomical compartment
  • Mortality
  • Trauma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication. / El-Menyar, Ayman; Abdelrahman, Husham; Al-Thani, Hassan; Zarour, Ahmad; Parchani, Ashok; Peralta, Ruben; Latifi, Rifat -.

In: Journal of Trauma Management and Outcomes, 15.09.2014, p. 1-8.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

El-Menyar, Ayman ; Abdelrahman, Husham ; Al-Thani, Hassan ; Zarour, Ahmad ; Parchani, Ashok ; Peralta, Ruben ; Latifi, Rifat -. / Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication. In: Journal of Trauma Management and Outcomes. 2014 ; pp. 1-8.
@article{aa60c7fc7b404a9eb73db7ab7b6939b3,
title = "Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication",
abstract = "Background: The mechanism and outcome of traumatic abdominal injury (TAI) varies worldwide. Moreover, data comparing TAIs in each abdominal compartment are lacking. We aimed to assess from the academic point of view, TAI based on its anatomical compartments. Patients & methods: We conducted a retrospective study for TAI patients between 2008 and 2011 in Qatar. Patients were categorized according to the involved anatomical compartment (C): intrathoracic (ITC), retroperitoneal (RPC), true abdomen (TAC), and pelvic abdomen (PAC) group. Chi Square test, One-Way ANOVA and multivariate regression analysis were appropriately performed. Results: Of 6,888 patients admitted to the trauma unit, 1,036 (15{\%}) had TAI that were grouped as ITC (65{\%}), RPC (15{\%}), TAC (13{\%}), and PAC (7{\%}). The mean age was lowest in ITC (29 ± 13) and highest in TAC (34 ± 11) group, (P = 0.001). Motor vehicle crash was the main mechanism of injury in all groups except for PAC, in which fall dominated. Vast majority of expatriates had PAC and TAC injuries. The main abdominal injuries included liver (35{\%}; ITC), spleen (32{\%}; ITC) and kidneys (18{\%}; RPC). Extra-abdominal injuries involved the head in RPC and ITC, lung in ITC and RPC and extremities in PAC. Mean ISS was higher in RPC and ITC. Abdominal AIS was higher in TAC injuries. Overall hospital mortality was 10{\%}: RPC (15{\%}), TAC (11{\%}), ITC (9.4{\%}) and PAC (1.5{\%}). Concurrent traumatic brain injury (OR 5.3; P = 0.001) and need for blood transfusion (OR 3.03; P = 0.003) were the main independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion: In addition to its academic value, the anatomical approach of TAI would be a complementary tool for better understanding and prediction of the pattern and outcome of TAI. This would be possible if further research find accurate, early diagnostic tool for this anatomical classification.",
keywords = "Abdominal injury, Anatomical compartment, Mortality, Trauma",
author = "Ayman El-Menyar and Husham Abdelrahman and Hassan Al-Thani and Ahmad Zarour and Ashok Parchani and Ruben Peralta and Latifi, {Rifat -}",
year = "2014",
month = "9",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1186/1752-2897-8-14",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--8",
journal = "Journal of Trauma Management and Outcomes",
issn = "1752-2897",
publisher = "Springer Science + Business Media",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Compartmental anatomical classification of traumatic abdominal injuries from the academic point of view and its potential clinical implication

AU - El-Menyar, Ayman

AU - Abdelrahman, Husham

AU - Al-Thani, Hassan

AU - Zarour, Ahmad

AU - Parchani, Ashok

AU - Peralta, Ruben

AU - Latifi, Rifat -

PY - 2014/9/15

Y1 - 2014/9/15

N2 - Background: The mechanism and outcome of traumatic abdominal injury (TAI) varies worldwide. Moreover, data comparing TAIs in each abdominal compartment are lacking. We aimed to assess from the academic point of view, TAI based on its anatomical compartments. Patients & methods: We conducted a retrospective study for TAI patients between 2008 and 2011 in Qatar. Patients were categorized according to the involved anatomical compartment (C): intrathoracic (ITC), retroperitoneal (RPC), true abdomen (TAC), and pelvic abdomen (PAC) group. Chi Square test, One-Way ANOVA and multivariate regression analysis were appropriately performed. Results: Of 6,888 patients admitted to the trauma unit, 1,036 (15%) had TAI that were grouped as ITC (65%), RPC (15%), TAC (13%), and PAC (7%). The mean age was lowest in ITC (29 ± 13) and highest in TAC (34 ± 11) group, (P = 0.001). Motor vehicle crash was the main mechanism of injury in all groups except for PAC, in which fall dominated. Vast majority of expatriates had PAC and TAC injuries. The main abdominal injuries included liver (35%; ITC), spleen (32%; ITC) and kidneys (18%; RPC). Extra-abdominal injuries involved the head in RPC and ITC, lung in ITC and RPC and extremities in PAC. Mean ISS was higher in RPC and ITC. Abdominal AIS was higher in TAC injuries. Overall hospital mortality was 10%: RPC (15%), TAC (11%), ITC (9.4%) and PAC (1.5%). Concurrent traumatic brain injury (OR 5.3; P = 0.001) and need for blood transfusion (OR 3.03; P = 0.003) were the main independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion: In addition to its academic value, the anatomical approach of TAI would be a complementary tool for better understanding and prediction of the pattern and outcome of TAI. This would be possible if further research find accurate, early diagnostic tool for this anatomical classification.

AB - Background: The mechanism and outcome of traumatic abdominal injury (TAI) varies worldwide. Moreover, data comparing TAIs in each abdominal compartment are lacking. We aimed to assess from the academic point of view, TAI based on its anatomical compartments. Patients & methods: We conducted a retrospective study for TAI patients between 2008 and 2011 in Qatar. Patients were categorized according to the involved anatomical compartment (C): intrathoracic (ITC), retroperitoneal (RPC), true abdomen (TAC), and pelvic abdomen (PAC) group. Chi Square test, One-Way ANOVA and multivariate regression analysis were appropriately performed. Results: Of 6,888 patients admitted to the trauma unit, 1,036 (15%) had TAI that were grouped as ITC (65%), RPC (15%), TAC (13%), and PAC (7%). The mean age was lowest in ITC (29 ± 13) and highest in TAC (34 ± 11) group, (P = 0.001). Motor vehicle crash was the main mechanism of injury in all groups except for PAC, in which fall dominated. Vast majority of expatriates had PAC and TAC injuries. The main abdominal injuries included liver (35%; ITC), spleen (32%; ITC) and kidneys (18%; RPC). Extra-abdominal injuries involved the head in RPC and ITC, lung in ITC and RPC and extremities in PAC. Mean ISS was higher in RPC and ITC. Abdominal AIS was higher in TAC injuries. Overall hospital mortality was 10%: RPC (15%), TAC (11%), ITC (9.4%) and PAC (1.5%). Concurrent traumatic brain injury (OR 5.3; P = 0.001) and need for blood transfusion (OR 3.03; P = 0.003) were the main independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion: In addition to its academic value, the anatomical approach of TAI would be a complementary tool for better understanding and prediction of the pattern and outcome of TAI. This would be possible if further research find accurate, early diagnostic tool for this anatomical classification.

KW - Abdominal injury

KW - Anatomical compartment

KW - Mortality

KW - Trauma

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928542369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84928542369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1752-2897-8-14

DO - 10.1186/1752-2897-8-14

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84928542369

SP - 1

EP - 8

JO - Journal of Trauma Management and Outcomes

JF - Journal of Trauma Management and Outcomes

SN - 1752-2897

ER -