Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopy in the treatment and diagnosis of penetrating thoraco-abdominal injury has been established. However, there is no clear consensus on the role of laparoscopy in blunt injury due to numerous reasons, such as concerns of missed injury and technical problems in treating various abdominal organs. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of laparoscopy and evaluate its safety in managing blunt and penetrating abdominal trauma. METHODS: The medical records and Korean Trauma Data Base (KTDB) of patients who underwent abdominal surgery from January 2018 to December 2022 at a single level I center were collected. Patients were classified into a laparoscopy group and a laparotomy group. The laparoscopy groups were matched 1:1 with the laparotomy group by using propensity score matching (PSM). Patient demographics, injured organ and its grade, operative procedure, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 128 patients were included. There was no significant imbalance in demographics between the two groups except sex. Injured organ and its grade showed no significant differences between the two groups except for the incidence of omentum. Small bowel and mesenteric repair were performed most often in both groups. Splenectomy, pancreatic surgery, duodenectomy, and liver resection were performed exclusively in the laparotomy group. Severe postoperative complication rate (3% vs. 20%: p = 0.004), length of stay in ICU (3.3 ± 3.2 days vs. 4.6 ± 3.7; p = 0.046), and operation time (93.9 ± 47.7 min vs. 112.8 ± 57.7; p = 0.046) were significantly lower in the laparoscopy group. The conversion rate was about 16%. There was no missed injury. CONCLUSIONS: In hemodynamically stable abdominal trauma patients who sustained penetrating or blunt injury, laparoscopy is feasible and safe as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality in selected cohort of abdominal trauma.