Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 318 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
28.08.2026
Размер:
58 Мб
Скачать
420
https://t.me/medicina_free
ab
G. C. Velmahos
Fig. 50.1 (a) Extended Kocher maneuver. Note that the peritoneal incision starts at the distal ileum, and the entire right colon is reected medially. (b) The duodenum is fully mobilized, making it possible to inspect the pancreas, inferior vena cava (IVC), and retroperitoneal space
tamination from the duodenal perforation, the denitive operation should not be planned before the abdomen is fully explored. It is in this way that the decision is made to proceed to a long operation versus abbreviating the
procedure along damage-control principles. The extent of the duodenal injuries, the presence and severity of other injuries, and the physiologic condition of the patient will dictate the ultimate intraoperative plan.
50 Duodenum
https://t.me/medicina_free
421
a
b
a
b
Fig. 50.2 (a) Full mobilization of the duodenum revealing the anterior surface of the head of the pancreas. Note the clamp that closes the lac­eration temporarily to control contamination. (b) The posterior surface of the duodenum and head of the pancreas are also easily inspected after the Kocher mobilization
50.2 Grade-Specic Operative Management
50.2.1 Grade I
The majority of these injuries are managed nonoperatively with success. Duodenal hematomas have been reported with a higher frequency among pediatric than adult patients. They are usually discovered on CT scan and on occasions are totally obstructing the lumen. The majority of them are absorbed with time and the lumen reopens. Two issues need to be claried when a grade I injury is detected: (a) Is it indeed only a hema­toma or is the hematoma covering a full- thickness laceration? A careful inspection of the CT scan for extraluminal air or oral contrast resolves the dilemma in most patients evaluated by new-generation scanners (16- or 64-slice). If not, a formal con­trast swallow will show whether the contrast remains within the duodenal contour or leaks extraluminally. (b) How long should
Fig. 50.3 (a, b) Axial and coronal cut of a massive duodenal hema- toma. Despite its size, the patient had no complaints except mild epigas­tric pain and gastric outlet obstruction. He was managed nonoperatively with nasogastric tube drainage, and the obstruction eventually resolved on post-trauma day 23
one wait before decompressing a totally occluding hematoma? There is no clear answer to this question. Most hematomas will be absorbed—at least partially—within 7–10 days, and the patency of the bowel lumen will be restored. I certainly con­sider it acceptable to wait up to 15days with a nasogastric tube in place before surgical decompression is considered and have personally waited for 23days before a massive hematoma was reabsorbed and the lumen became patent again (Fig.50.3).
422
https://t.me/medicina_free
50.2.2 Grade II
Such injuries are produced either by very large hematomas or—more frequently—by simple lacerations of the duode­num that occupy less than 50% of the circumference. The management of hematomas is not different than what was described previously. Duodenal lacerations are sutured pri­marily. Debridement of the rugged edges is important to make sure that well-vascularized tissue is present. Then, close the perforation in one layer with interrupted invaginat­ing Gambee stitches (Fig.50.4) using a 3-0 nonabsorbable or slowly absorbable suture. A two-layer closure—typically with a running absorbable suture and a second layer of inter­rupted nonabsorbable sutures—is also acceptable, although I typically use only one layer in repairing any part of the intes­tine. It is important that the line of closure is perpendicular to the axis of the lumen in order to avoid stenosis. Drain the area per routine. No other procedures are necessary.
50.2.3 Grades III andIV
G. C. Velmahos
Fig. 50.5 Exclusion of the pylorus by ring a TA stapler at the pyloric ring
There is a debate about the correct management of grade III injuries which lie in between grades I and II, managed either nonoperatively or with simple repair, and grades IV and V, managed usually with more complex techniques. These tech­niques include pyloric exclusion, serosal patch, duodenoje­junal anastomosis, and resection with anastomosis.
Pyloric exclusion aims to divert all supraduodenal secre­tions from the repair, not only to prevent distention by the volume of uids but also to avoid activation of pancreatic enzymes by gastric contents. Before pyloric exclusion, the duodenal laceration must be sutured, per the techniques described above. Then, exclude the pylorus by either ring a TA stapler at this level (Fig.50.5) or opening the stomach at
Fig. 50.6 Exclusion of the pylorus by making a gastrotomy in the near vicinity and placing a suture at the pyloric ring level
Fig. 50.4 Closure of simple duodenal laceration (after debridement of the edges) with a Gambee suture
the antrum and suturing the pylorus from the inside (Fig. 50.6). The gastrotomy should be placed at the most dependent position of the stomach in order to serve as the site of the gastrojejunostomy. Through the gastrotomy, grasp the pylorus with an atraumatic clamp to bring it close to the gastrotomy. Then, place either a purse-string or an interlock-
50 Duodenum
https://t.me/medicina_free
423
Fig. 50.7 Standard gastrojejunal anastomosis (preferably retrocolic) by using the gastrotomy site of the pyloric exclusion
ing running suture using nonabsorbable or slowly absorbable material. It has been suggested that nonabsorbable sutures are allowed because the pyloric exclusion almost always opens with time under the continuous peristaltic force of the stomach. In any case, leave a long tail on your suture, so that it can be identied, grasped, and cut via gastroscopy, if this is deemed appropriate in the future. Following the pyloric exclusion, a jejunal loop is brought at the gastrotomy site to function as the new gastric outlet (Fig.50.7). A retrocolic gastrojejunostomy is performed per routine (Fig.50.8).
In large injuries of the duodenum, primary closure of the defect may be undesirable because it produces stenosis or places the suture line under great tension. In this situation, the defect can be sealed by bringing a loop of jejunum and suturing its serosal surface on the debrided duodenal wound (Fig.50.9). This is commonly referred to as a Thal patch. A second circumferential line of interrupted seromuscular sutures is placed between the jejunum and duodenum all around the rst line of repair in order to diminish the tension at the rst suture line and prevent leaks.
On occasions, even a Thal patch may produce stenosis at the injury level. Under these circumstances, a loop of jeju­num may be brought and opened to create a side-to-side Roux-en-Y duodenojejunal anastomosis (Fig. 50.10). Finally, for extensive injuries of the fourth or even the third portion of the duodenum, resection and primary end-to-end
Fig. 50.8 Completed pyloric exclusion with gastrojejunal anastomosis
anastomosis are possible (Fig.50.11). This is easier done at the fourth portion which is more mobile after dissection of the ligament of Treitz. It becomes more challenging in the third portion, as adequate mobilization of the medial por­tion of the duodenum to provide a tissue margin for anasto­mosis can be hard. The duodenum is attached to the pancreas, and dissection of its medial side requires ligation of small vessels, which may compromise the blood supply to the anastomotic line. The feasibility of resection and a safe anastomosis clearly relies on careful intraoperative assessment of the anatomical conditions and the proximal extent of the injury.
When a complex repair is necessary, strongly consider adding a pyloric exclusion to offer extra protection at the injury repair suture line. Also, consider a feeding jejunos­tomy, as the complication rate is substantial and enteral feeding may not be possible, if not directed distally to the repair.
In desperate situations, the duodenal injury is so large that it simply cannot be repaired. Then, a pancreatoduodenec­tomy (Whipple procedure) may be appropriate and will be
424
https://t.me/medicina_free
G. C. Velmahos
Fig. 50.9 (a, b) Serosal patch on large duodenal perforation by suturing a loop of uninvolved bowel to the edges of the laceration
a
discussed below. If the patient is not stable for such an exten­sive procedure, the insertion of a large-bore mushroom­tipped tube in the duodenal lumen and closure around the tube with a purse-string suture may be the only remaining choice, even if far from optimal (Fig.50.12). The tube is brought out through the skin to create a directed lateral duo­denal stula. Drains should be placed around the area, as the leak rate after this procedure is high.
As mentioned, there are no clear guidelines about using simple repair or complex techniques. It has been shown that as the grade of injury increases, complex techniques should be used more liberally to prevent complications. I tend to manage the majority of grade III injuries with a simple repair, whereas grade IV injuries usually require complex techniques.
50.2.4 Grade V
These are the worst possible injuries as they involve the pan­creas and quite frequently other peripancreatic vessels and structures. The surgical strategy for this type of injuries obeys in the rule of “all or nothing.” If the patient’s intraop­erative hemodynamic condition allows and in the presence of violation of the ampulla or the major pancreatic duct, a for­mal pancreatoduodenectomy may be necessary. This is the “all” approach. Start, as always, with the wide Kocher maneuver. Identify the injury of the major pancreatic duct and/or ampulla of Vater. This is not always easy. A variety of
b
techniques have been described, including cannulating the ampulla or cannulating the cystic duct (after cholecystec­tomy) and injecting contrast. The sensitivity and specicity of these techniques are completely unknown. I believe that they are not much better than a careful dissection and inspec­tion of the structures. If in doubt, err toward doing less. If not in doubt about injury to one of the abovementioned struc­tures, proceed! Divide the antrum and proximal jejunum with a stapler and the distal common bile duct sharply. Elevate the specimen off the retroperitoneum and divide the pancreas distal to the injury, saving as much pancreatic mass as possible (Fig.50.13). Three anastomoses follow, includ­ing the pancreaticojejunal, biliary-jejunal, and gastrojejunal suture lines (Fig. 50.14). Numerous techniques have been described for each one of these anastomoses, and the detailed description of these techniques goes beyond the scope of the chapter. I prefer a telescoping two-layered pancreaticojeju­nal anastomosis, a one-layered biliary-jejunal anastomosis after “sh mouthing” the usually narrow common bile duct (no stents are placed in the anastomosis), and a standard gas­trojejunal anastomosis.
On the other hand, a hemodynamically unstable patient should never have a Whipple procedure. Instead, one should have an abbreviated damage-control operation. This I call the “nothing” approach only to contrast it with the time­consuming pancreatoduodenectomy but with no intent to minimize its lifesaving potential. Such a patient should have only temporary closure of all the perforations and ligation or shunting of the major bleeding sites. Then, the patient
Jejunum
50 Duodenum
https://t.me/medicina_free
425
ab
Fig. 50.11 (a, b) Resection and primary anastomosis of the third/ fourth part of the duodenum. This technique is not performed for proxi­mal duodenal injuries
Fig. 50.10 Duodenojejunal anastomosis to treat a large perforation of the duodenum, which would produce stenosis of the lumen if closed primarily
Fig. 50.12 Directed duodenocutaneous stula by insertion of large tube into duodenal perforation
426
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 50.13 Gunshot wound injury through the head of the pancreas and pancreatoduodenectomy specimen
ab
G. C. Velmahos
ing recommendations can be considered, even if not appli­cable, to all patients:
1. Grade I injuries are almost always managed nonopera-
tively. Be patient if there is obstruction from a hematoma. Most will open up with time and nasogastric tube decompression.
2. Grade II injuries are almost always managed by simple
repair. Debride the edges of the wound and close it primarily.
3. Grades III and IV injuries require careful intraoperative
evaluation. Most grade III injuries are amenable to simple repair. Most grade IV injuries require a more complex procedure, which usually is a pyloric exclusion.
4. Grade V injuries fall under the “all or nothing” rule. You
will either need to do a Whipple procedure after suspect­ing major pancreatic duct injury on a hemodynamically stable patient or a damage-control procedure on an unsta­ble patient. If in doubt, prefer to do the minimal required. You can then reevaluate the patient under more controlled conditions and offer the denitive operation at a later stage.
Fig. 50.14 (a, b) Pancreatoduodenectomy
should be packed and returned with an open abdomen to the intensive care unit for resuscitation. The denitive repairs can be done in follow-up procedures, as described above.
50.3 Conclusions
DIs are rather infrequent injuries which may prove to be par­ticularly challenging in terms of intraoperative selection of the correct procedure according to the extent of the injury and the patient’s hemodynamic status. The existing evidence does not elevate above Level III, and therefore, universally accepted guidelines are hard to nd. In general, the follow-
Important Points
• The majority of duodenal injuries can be sufciently
managed by primary repair only.
• Always put drains at the area of repair.
• Concomitant injury to the head of the pancreas increases
morbidity and mortality.
• Pyloric exclusion can be considered in high-grade
injuries.
• Grade V duodenal injuries usually require damage control
or pancreatoduodenectomy or both.
Suggested Reading
Degiannis E, Boffard K. Duodenal injuries. Br J Surg.
2000;87(11):1473–9. Degiannis E, Krawczykowski D, Velmahos GC, Levy RD, Souter I,
Saadia R. Pyloric exclusion in severe penetrating injuries of the
duodenum. World J Surg. 1993;17(6):751–4. Lopez PP, Benjamin R, Cockburn M, Amortegui JD, Schulman CI,
Soffer D, Blackbourne L, Habib F, Jerokhimov I, Trankel S, Cohn
SM.Recent trends in the management of combined pancreatoduo-
denal injuries. Am Surg. 2005;71(10):847–52. Seamon MJ, Pieri PG, Fisher CA, Gaughan J, Santora TA, Pathak
AS, Bradley KM, Goldberg AJ. A 10-year retrospective review:
does pyloric exclusion improve outcome after penetrating duo-
denal and combined pancreatoduodenal injuries? J Trauma.
2007;62(4):829–33. Velmahos GC, Kamel E, Chan LS, Hanpeter D, Asensio JA, Murray JA,
Berne TV, Demetriades D.Complex repair for the management of
duodenal injuries. Am Surg. 1999;65(10):972–5.
Penetrating Trauma tothePancreas
https://t.me/medicina_free
MartinD.Smith, DietrichDoll, andEliasDegiannis
51
The pancreas is likened to the base player in a band; no one ever knows the name of the base player, but when he is not there, the band falls terribly at. This rather innocuous gland situated posteriorly in the retroperitoneum is only really taken seriously when it gives trouble, and when it gives trou­ble, it requires experience and a good knowledge of anatomy and surgical techniques to solve the problems. Penetrating trauma to the pancreas is not very common. Due to its ana­tomical location and relationship to major vessels, isolated injury to the pancreas is even more rare, and it is usually the associated injuries, often aggravated by the consequences of the pancreatic injury, that result in the fairly high morbidity and mortality associated with pancreatic trauma.
Blunt pancreatic trauma is more often isolated and due to the often insidious nature of the clinical picture is difcult to diagnose. Much has been written about the role of biochemi­cal markers and imaging studies to diagnose pancreatic trauma in the absence of an acute abdomen or in the hemodynami­cally unstable patient. In penetrating trauma, the diagnosis is often only made intraoperatively, and it is, therefore, very important to recognize the subtle intraoperative ndings.
Identication often requires extensive mobilization of the pancreas, but in general, the management requires less aggressive surgery. There are two guiding principles: iden-
M. D. Smith Department of Surgery, University of the Witwatersrand Medical School, Johannesburg, South Africa
Hepatopancreaticobilary Unit, Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital, University of the Witwatersrand Medical School, Johannesburg, South Africa e-mail: martin.smith@wits.ac.za
D. Doll Medical Faculty Saarland University, Homburg, Germany
Department of Colorectal Surgery, St. Mary’s Hospital, Vechta, Germany
E. Degiannis (*) Department of Surgery, University of the Witwatersrand Medical School, Johannesburg, South Africa e-mail: degiannis@yebo.co.za
tify the extent of the parenchymal injury, and, second, the injury to the main pancreatic duct (MPD) needs to be identi­ed and quantied.
The general rules that apply to the management of pene­trating trauma also apply to injury of the pancreas. Full resuscitation including the primary and secondary survey is followed, and the decision to proceed to surgery is based on the accepted criteria and protocols. There are those patients who remain unstable who require urgent transport to the OR.The stable patient with an acute abdomen requires sur­gery and should be fully resuscitated and then taken to the OR.The patient who has limited abdominal signs should be investigated further and observed as per accepted protocols.
Once in the OR, a midline laparotomy is performed, and again the usual guidelines as to how to manage penetrating trauma to the abdomen is followed. Often following the tract of the bullet or knife may indicate an injury to the pancreas. This is not always the case, and as such, certain features may suggest the presence of a pancreatic injury like the follow­ing: uid collection in the lesser sac, bile staining of retro­peritoneal tissues, presence of fat necrosis of the omentum or the retroperitoneum, or a hematoma overlying the pancreas.
It is essential to remember that the most important factor in the outcome for the patient is the presence or absence of a main pancreatic duct (MPD) injury. In the acute situation of pancreatic (especially penetrating) trauma, there is no place for the pre-operative evaluation of the injury by radiology or ERCP.Intraoperative observation is the only method used to detect ductal damage, based on the intraoperative criteria of the main pancreatic duct injury described by Heitsch etal. These include direct visualization of ductal violation, com­plete transection of the pancreas, laceration of more than half the diameter of the pancreas, central perforation, and severe maceration of the gland. Further intraoperative decision­making can be assisted by the grading of the injury and the standard guidelines for the management of each grade. There are numerous classication systems, and they all have in common a measure of the extent of the parenchymal and main ductal injury. We prefer the American Association for
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 E. Degiannis et al. (eds.), Penetrating Trauma, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47006-6_51
427
428
https://t.me/medicina_free
M. D. Smith et al.
the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Committee on Organ Injury Scaling classication.
To accurately grade the injury the injured region of the pancreas must be fully mobilized. Exposure of the head of the pancreas requires kocherization of the head of the pan­creas. Retract the inferior surface of the liver superiorly; retract the transverse colon including the hepatic exure inferiorly. Your assistant should place their hand over the head of the pancreas and the second part of the duodenum and retract the head toward the left. The role of the assistance retracting the duodenum to the left cannot be underestimated, because it is this maneuver that exposes the correct dissec­tion plane. This maneuver exposes the lateral aspect of the retroperitoneal portion of the duodenum. Incise the perito­neal reection being careful not to damage the serosa of the duodenum. The IVC is identied posterior to this plane. Using a combination of blunt and sharp dissection, we use the diathermy knife to achieve this dissection, and the duode­num is mobilized to the left until the aorta is identied. There is a branch of the IVC that runs inferiorly to the right of the IVC that is easily torn in this maneuver. The duodenum is freed from the retroperitoneum as far superiorly as the fora­men of Winslow that identies the tunnel that passes behind the portal triad. Inferiorly the duodenum is mobilized dis­tally by carefully identifying the tissue that holds the trans­verse mesocolon and the lateral aspect of the junction between the second and third parts of the duodenum. This plane is identied by the surgeon holding the head of the pancreas and duodenum in his left hand, while the assistant holds the transverse colon and mesentery upward and into the incision. Dividing this tissue opens up the head of the pancreas and mobilizes the uncinate process up to the right lateral edge of the superior mesenteric vein. Be prepared to mobilize the head of the pancreas as far medially as the aorta. At this point, the head of the pancreas is easily examined both anteriorly and posteriorly.
If there is suspicion that the distal pancreas has been injured, this should be visualized by opening the lesser sac. The surgeon performs this from the patient’s right side, and opens the lesser sac. This is achieved by detaching the greater omentum from the transverse colon along the bloodless line or dividing the gastrocolic vessels in the omentum using an energy devise or between serially placed artery forceps. There are times that the greater omentum and the transverse mesocolon are “stuck” together, and it is difcult to separate them with this approach without risking damage to the trans­verse mesocolon and its corresponding vasculature. If the surgeon nds himself or herself in this situation, they should proceed with the following maneuver: The surgeon lifts up the stomach by grasping the anterior surface with his/her
right hand and breaks the lesser omentum with the ngers of the left hand making sure that one does not damage the vas­culature of the lesser curvature of the stomach. Then, the sur­geon’s whole left hand is inserted along the back of the stomach, ngers pointing caudally, and by moving the whole palm in a transverse and caudal plane, one will easily open the potential lesser sac space by separating the greater omen­tum from the transverse mesocolon. The surgeon should make sure that the opening of the lesser sac is generous and so should proceed with the division of the greater omentum up to the inferior short gastric vessels.
If there is suspicion that the injury may involve the distal tail of the pancreas near the hilum of the spleen, the lieno­splenic, splenocolic, and splenorenal ligaments are incised and the spleen mobilized, by rotating it medially and lifting it upward toward the incision but being careful not to dam­age the short gastric arteries. This will allow inspection of the anterior as well as the posterior aspects of the tail of the pancreas. The same maneuver can be used in visualizing the body and the tail, but because it requires signicant mobili­zation of the spleen and the pancreas from the retroperitoneal space, it can lead to signicant oozing especially in the coag­ulopathic patient. An alternative approach to visualizing the body of the pancreas is by incising the avascular peritoneal attachment of the transverse mesocolon to the pancreas and exposing the inferior border of the pancreas. This is done by sharp dissection with Metzenbaum scissors or using a dia­thermy needle knife. As the peritoneum is divided, 2 or 3mm of retroperitoneal fat is seen bulging at the line of division between the lower border of the pancreas and incised meso­colon. There are very few vessels in this space, and if they are cut, they can easily be controlled using diathermy. This incision is extended as far laterally as possible toward the spleen. Then, the surgeon should start mobilizing the pan­creas anteriorly up by inserting the index and middle nger of the right hand, facing upward, in the retroperitoneal space behind the pancreas. The surgeon bluntly dissects the poste­rior surface of the pancreas from the retroperitoneum using their ngers till they reach the superior border of the pan­creas. The peritoneum exposed along the superior border of the pancreas is then incised. One must not worry about the veins along the posterior surface of the pancreas in this ana­tomical area as it is largely avascular and the tissues easily separated. On the other hand, the surgeon must always keep in mind that the splenic artery is running at the upper border of the pancreas, so when dividing the peritoneum along the upper border of the pancreas, the artery is not damaged. This will now allow cephalad rotation of the pancreas and inspec­tion of the posterior surface and bimanual palpation (Fig.51.1).
51 Penetrating Trauma tothePancreas
https://t.me/medicina_free
429
Fig. 51.1 Rotation of the body and the tail of the pancreas for the inspection of its posterior aspect
The Organ Injury Scaling (OIS) Committee of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) for pancreatic trauma
Grade Criteria I Simple contusion of the pancreas II Major contusion or laceration without tissue loss or
involvement of the main pancreatic duct
III Complete transection of the pancreas or a parenchymal
injury with involvement of the major duct to the left of the SMV
IV Ductal transection or a major parenchymal injury to the
right of the SMV
V Massive disruption of the head of the pancreas
The rst step to perform resection of the mobilized distal pancreas should be to ligate the splenic artery and vein to decrease the possibility of extensive bleeding during the resection. Ligation of both vessels about 2cm to the right of the injury site is performed so that they are not inadvertently damaged during the transection of the parenchyma. In the same way, the surgeon should continue the mobilization of the pancreas also for 2cm to the right to the site of the pro­posed resection line. The surgeon then takes a soft bowel clamp and applies it on the pancreas as proximally as possi­ble and divides the parenchyma with a scalpel or a modern electrocautery device. By intermittently releasing the soft
For minor parenchymal injuries without ductal disruption (grades I and II), we do not suture the gland but would leave a drain onto the site of the injury. We use soft silicone suction drains.
If the parenchyma is signicantly divided or the main pancreatic duct (MPD) disrupted, for injuries to the left of the PV/SMV, we advocate a distal pancreatectomy.
bowel clamp, one will identify the superior and inferior pan­creatic arteries and overrun them with a 5-0 Prolene gure­of-eight stitch. The bites of the needle are as close as possible to the bleeding vessel, including minimal pancreatic tissue. If it is applied further away from the vessel, there is a good possibility that the thin stitch will cut through the paren­chyma while applying tension on throwing the knot causing small irritating bleeding. Linear stapling devices when avail-