HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Romaldas Rubikas Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rubikas, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rubikas, R. Related Collections Diaphragm

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:53-57
© 2001 Elsevier Science NL

Diaphragmatic injuries

Thoracic Surgery Clinic, Kaunas Medical University Hospital, Eiveniu 2, LT-3007 Kaunas, Lithuania

Received 17 April 2000; received in revised form 26 February 2001; accepted 6 April 2001.

Tel.: +370-7-733646; fax: +370-7-798585

Objectives: (1) To determine the actual incidence rate of blunt and penetrating diaphragmatic injuries (DI); (2) to evaluate the effectiveness of urgent surgical intervention for treatment of DI; and (3) to reveal main causes of postoperative complications. Methods: We reviewed: (1) forensic medical examination charts of 3353 subjects, who died due to polytrauma (including injuries to the chest and/or abdomen) at accident sites; and (2) medical case reports of 4857 patients, treated for thoracoabdominal trauma (TAT) from 1962 to 1998. A detailed analysis was completed with 12 years (1987–1998) of clinical experience, involving 65 (43 penetrating, and 22 blunt) cases of DI. Results: According to forensic medical data, blunt and penetrating DI occurred in 3.7% and 2.6% of individual cases, respectively. Among patients suffering from TAT, it was revealed that blunt DI had occurred in 1.1%, and penetrating in 3.9% of the cases. This data indicates if all the victims, who had sustained TAT, had survived, the incidence rate of DI would have been 2.6% (blunt – 2.1%, and penetrating – 3.4%). All the patients, provided surgical operations due to DI, survived. Morbidity in patients, suffering from blunt and penetrating DI, was 50%, and 35%, respectively. In the group of patients, suffering from penetrating DI, shock, intrapleural and/or intraabdominal haemorrhage, and liver injuries constituted a significant (P<0.05) influence, relevant to development of postoperative complications. The risk of complications was significantly (P<0.05) greater in cases of gunshot injuries. Fractures of chest bones, injuries of abdominal organs, and intraabdominal haemorrhage constituted a significant influence (P<0.05), relevant to development of complications after blunt DI. Conclusions: (1) The danger to the health or even life of patients is not directly caused by DI, but by consequential complications and associated injuries; (2) the effectiveness of treatment is determined by purposeful surgical diagnostics with particular regard to DI and urgent surgical intervention.

Key Words: Thoracoabdominal trauma • Penetrating and blunt diaphragmatic injury • Urgent surgery

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. C. Hanna, L. E. Ferri, P. Fata, T. Razek, and D. S. Mulder The Current Status of Traumatic Diaphragmatic Injury: Lessons Learned From 105 Patients Over 13 Years Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2008; 85(3): 1044 - 1048. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Van Tornout, M. Van Leuven, and W. Parry Pericardio-diaphragmatic avulsion and concomitant rupture of the central tendon of the diaphragm Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., September 1, 2004; 26(3): 655 - 657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]