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 / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_663_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
58 Мб
Скачать
29 Surgical Strategies inTrauma totheHead, Face, andNeck
https://t.me/medicina_free
255
agement now largely based on the hemodynamic status of the patient, rather than the associated anatomical distribution of external wound(s). Patients who are hemodynamically unstable or found to have hard signs of vascular injury (Table29.3) are taken to the operating room for immediate surgical exploration, delayed only by securing an unstable airway through endotracheal intubation or surgical airway as needed. In hemodynamically stable patients, the determina­tion to be made is whether or not the injury has violated the platysma muscle; supercial wounds need no further workup and may be closed primarily. Blind exploration of penetrat­ing injuries that violate the platysma is not advised due to potential for reactivation of bleeding from a stable hema­toma, but not all of these injuries will require operative exploration. Removal of a retained penetrating implement is best performed after preemptive vascular control is attained, usually by means of operative exposure but potentially via angiography if the location of the injury is amenable to this modality. Given the low incidence of associated cervical spine injuries, the routine use of cervical collar placement is not indicated, as this can obscure complete evaluation and recognition of life-threatening injuries, as well as impede safe airway securement.
Hemodynamically stable patients with conrmed pene­trating neck injury should proceed for computed tomo­graphic angiography (CTA) of the neck for better delineation of possible internal injury, with the need for surgical inter­vention pending imaging ndings. Increasingly accurate and expeditious noninvasive computed tomographic angiogra­phy has become commonplace and has largely replaced stan­dard angiography in the initial evaluation of stable penetrating neck trauma. CT has the added benet of being a single diagnostic modality that may characterize associated hema­toma, laryngeal disruption, as well as both arterial and venous injuries. However, denitive exclusion of pharyngeal and esophageal injury requires additional diagnostic challenges.
Patients with negative CTA ndings should undergo sub­sequent contrast swallow study, as CT has poor sensitivity for ruling out pharyngoesophageal injury. The combination of contrast esophagram and endoscopy in ruling out such injury has a sensitivity nearing 100%. Positive ndings on CTA warrant further investigation pending the area of con­cern, such as directed angiography, bronchoscopy, endos­copy, contrast esophagram, or operative exploration. Suspected laryngotracheal injuries should be fully evaluated with endoscopy and bronchoscopy prior to operative explo­ration. If fracture of the larynx is suspected, a CT of the neck should be obtained to determine which patients may require operative repair.
The pharyngoesophagus includes the hypopharynx, bounded by the tip of the epiglottis superiorly and the crico­pharyngeus inferiorly, and the cervical esophagus. This area
is the most protected in the neck, and estimates of rates of injury in penetrating trauma range from 1 to 8%. While vas­cular injuries comprise the predominant cause of early mor­tality (whether due to exsanguination or airway occlusion), pharyngoesophageal injuries are responsible for the majority of the late deaths seen in penetrating neck trauma. Delay in repair of esophageal injury has been described as an inde­pendent risk factor for death. Therefore, the screening test performed should not only have a high sensitivity for detect­ing injury; it should also be performed and interpreted in a timely manner to facilitate expeditious repair.
If an injury to the pharynx is discovered and it is <2cm and does not involve the piriform sinuses below the aryte­noid cartilages, the patient may be treated by nonoperative observation with intravenous prophylactic antibiotics and without anything by mouth. There has been some debate over the best modality for esophageal evaluation: esopha­gography, rigid esophagoscopy, exible esophagoscopy, or a combination of the above. Weigelt etal. recommended that patients rst undergo esophagography and, if negative, pro­ceed with rigid esophagoscopy, citing a sensitivity of 100%. Srinivasan etal. found exible endoscopy to yield a sensitiv­ity of 100% and sensitivity of 92.4%. Most recent guidelines recommend either esophagography or endoscopy (either rigid or exible), emphasizing the importance of early assessment, rather the modality used.
All other hypopharyngeal and all esophageal injuries should be repaired in two layers after necrotic tissue is debrided. Muscle aps and closed suction drainage are advo­cated to encourage sealing of the repair and salivary diver­sion, particularly in the setting of adjacent vascular repair. It may be necessary to mobilize the pharynx from the hyoid bone to achieve greater length and a tension-free repair. If extensive tissue loss is encountered, more commonly experi­enced in gunshot wounds to the esophagus, a diverting esophagostomy and delayed repair should be performed.
For patients in whom vascular injury is discovered, repair or ligation/embolization of the vessel depends on the nature of the injury, the vessel injured, and the preoperative exami­nation. The vertebral artery is generally very well protected within the spinal column, with the exception of the portion in zone I, where it arises from the subclavian artery. As such, the incidence of these injuries is relatively low, and most are asymptomatic, discovered on angiography or CTA.Control may be achieved via angiographic embolization or with proximal and distal direct ligation. In situations where access is particularly difcult, bone wax compression can be used to obtain temporary control of hemorrhage and obtain time for either denitive surgical or endovascular management. Embolization is also recommended in vertebral arteriove­nous malformation and pseudoaneurysm.
All signicant penetrating carotid artery lesions should be repaired when technically feasible, either primarily or with
256
https://t.me/medicina_free
N. Wall et al.
patch angioplasty. If a signicant segment of artery is lost, interposition graft or internal to external carotid artery trans­position may be performed. Injuries to the distal internal carotid are especially challenging. Options include ligation, extracranial-intracranial bypass, or angiographic stenting. Controversy surrounds the population of injuries with preoperative coma, as initially it was thought that revascular­ization was associated with a higher incidence of hemor­rhagic conversion of ischemic infarction. More recent series suggest that because most decits remain unchanged or improve after repair, carotid repair should be carried out regardless of preoperative neurologic status, if technically possible. The majority of jugular venous injuries is likely unrecognized, due to the low-pressure venous system; how­ever, in those large enough to cause signicant hemorrhage, ligation of the jugular vein can generally be performed with­out consequence.
Important Points
• Initial evaluation must begin with airway assessment and, when injury or compromise is suspected, early denitive control obtained. Preparation for a difcult airway is key, and consideration given to use of intubation adjuncts, ber-optic or rigid bronchoscopy, and surgical cricothy­roidotomy depending on the clinical situation.
• Penetrating brain injury should be evaluated with CTA to delineate injury tract and associated vascular injuries. Surgical management may include early debridement or craniectomy for decompression and hematoma evacuation.
• Facial injury is best imaged with CT or CTA with recon­structed multidimensional views. Timing of repair of soft tissue injury depends on complexity of wound and degree of contamination and may range from simple repair to sequential debridement with delayed secondary, graft or ap closure.
• Bony trauma is often managed with delayed reconstruc­tion. Perioperative antibiotics should be given and, except in the most heavily contaminated wounds, should not be continued beyond 24h postoperatively.
• All patients with penetrating neck injury who display hemodynamic instability or hard signs of vascular injury should undergo immediate operative exploration once the airway is secured.
• Patients with penetrating neck injury in the absence of hard signs should undergo evaluation with CTA and, if concern exists for aerodigestive tract injury, evaluation with esophagography or esophagoscopy.
• Hypopharyngeal and esophageal injuries should be debrided to viable tissue and repaired in two layers with closed suction drainage.
• Management of vascular injury in the neck is dependent on the nature of the injury and specic vessel injured and may include denitive ligation, endovascular manage­ment, or angiographic embolization.
Suggested Reading
Aarabi B, Taghipour M, Haghnegahdar A, Farokhi M, Mobley
L. Prognostic factors in the occurrence of posttraumatic epilepsy after penetrating head injury suffered during military service. Neurosurg Focus. 2000;8(1):e1.
Amirjamshidi A, Abbassioun K, Rahmat H. Minimal debridement or
simple wound closure as the only surgical treatment in war victims with low-velocity penetrating head injuries. Indications and man­agement protocol based upon more than 8 years follow-up of 99 cases from Iran-Iraq conict. Surg Neurol. 2003;60(2):105–10; dis­cussion 110–111
Asensio JA, Berne J, Demetriades D, Murray J, Gomez H, Falabella
A, et al. Penetrating esophageal injuries: time interval of safety for preoperative evaluation--how long is safe? J Trauma. 1997;43(2):319–24.
Asensio JA, Valenziano CP, Falcone RE, Grosh JD. Management of
penetrating neck injuries. The controversy surrounding zone II inju­ries. Surg Clin North Am. 1991;71(2):267–96.
Bayston R, de Louvois J, Brown EM, Johnston RA, Lees P, Pople
IK. Use of antibiotics in penetrating craniocerebral injuries. “Infection in neurosurgery” working Party of British Society for antimicrobial chemotherapy. Lancet. 2000;355:1813–7.
Bell RS, Mossop CM, Dirks MS, Stephens FL, Mulligan L, Ecker
R, et al. Early decompressive craniectomy for severe penetrat­ing and closed head injury during wartime. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(5):E1.
Bodanapally UK, Shanmuganathan K, Dreizin D, Stein D, Reddy AK,
Mirvis SE, Vasquez M, Cardarelli C, Guardiani E. Penetrating aerodigestive injuries in the neck: a proposed CT-aided modied selective management algorithm. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(7):2409–17.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330- 015- 4050- 3. Epub 2015 Oct 22
Bradley EL.Management of penetrating carotid injuries: an alternative
approach. J Trauma. 1973;13(3):248–55.
Bruns J, Hauser WA. The epidemiology of traumatic brain injury: a
review. Epilepsia. 2003;44(Suppl 10):2–10.
Chandrananth ML, Zhang A, Voutier CR, Skandarajah A, Thomson
BNJ, Shakerian R, Read DJ. ‘No zone’ approach to the manage­ment of stable penetrating neck injuries: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91(6):1083–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.16600. Epub 2021 Jan 22
Chen AY, Stewart MG, Raup G. Penetrating injuries of the face.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;115(5):464–70.
Choi D, Spann R. Traumatic cerebrospinal uid leakage: risk fac-
tors and the use of prophylactic antibiotics. Br J Neurosurg. 1996;10(6):571–5.
Chole RA, Yee J.Antibiotic prophylaxis for facial fractures. A prospec-
tive, randomized clinical trial. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113(10):1055–7.
Clemenza JW, Kaltman SI, Diamond DL. Craniofacial trauma and
cerebrospinal uid leakage: a retrospective clinical study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;53(9):1004–7.
Cole RD, Browne JD, Phipps CD.Gunshot wounds to the mandible
and midface: evaluation, treatment, and avoidance of complications. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1994;111(6):739–45.
29 Surgical Strategies inTrauma totheHead, Face, andNeck
https://t.me/medicina_free
257
Cox MW, Whittaker DR, Martinez C, Fox CJ, Feuerstein IM, Gillespie
DL.Traumatic pseudoaneurysms of the head and neck: early endo­vascular intervention. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46(6):1227–33.
Cushing H.A study of a series of wounds involving the brain and its
enveloping structures. Br J Surg. 1917;5(20):558–684.
Demetriades D, Chahwan S, Gomez H, Falabella A, Velmahos G,
Yamashita D.Initial evaluation and management of gunshot wounds to the face. J Trauma Injury Infect Crit Care. 1998;45(1):39–41.
Dolin J, Scalea T, Mannor L, Sclafani S, Trooskin S.The management
of gunshot wounds to the face. J Trauma. 1992;33(4):508–14; dis­cussion 514–515
du Toit DF, van Schalkwyk GD, Wadee SA, Warren BL.Neurologic
outcome after penetrating extracranial arterial trauma. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38(2):257–62.
Fogelman MJ, Stewart RD.Penetrating wounds of the neck. Am J Surg.
1956;91(4):581–93; discussion 593–596
Gant TD, Epstein LI.Low-velocity gunshot wounds to the maxillofa-
cial complex. J Trauma Injury Infect Crit Care. 1979;19(9):674–7.
Gussack GS, Jurkovich GJ.Penetrating facial trauma: a management
plan. South Med J. 1988;81(3):297–302.
Harmon LA, Haase DJ, Kufera JA, Adnan S, Cabral D, Lottenberg L,
etal. Infection after penetrating brain injury-an eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter study oral presentation at the 32nd annual meeting of the eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, January 15–19, 2019, in Austin, Texas. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2019;87(1):61–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/
TA.0000000000002327. Erratum in: J Trauma Acute Care Surg.
2019 Sep;87(3):744
Ibraheem K, Wong S, Smith A, Guidry C, McGrew P, McGinness
C, Duchesne J, Taghavi S, Harris C, Schroll R. Computed tomography angiography in the “no-zone” approach era for penetrating neck trauma: a systematic review. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;89(6):1233–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/
TA.0000000000002919.
Intracranial pressure monitoring in the management of penetrating
brain injury. J Trauma. 2001;51(2 Suppl):S12–5.
Jimenez CM, Polo J, España JA.Risk factors for intracranial infection
secondary to penetrating craniocerebral gunshot wounds in civil­ian practice. World Neurosurg. 2013;79(5–6):749–55. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.wneu.2012.06.025. Epub 2012 Jun 19
Jinadasa SP, Feliciano DV.Management of a penetrating injury to the
carotid artery. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021;6(1):e000857.
https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco- 2021- 000857.
Johnson JT, Schuller DE, Silver F, Gluckman JL, Newman RK, Shagets
FW, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk head and neck sur­gery: one-day vs. ve-day therapy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1986;95(5):554–7.
Lauder A, Jalisi S, Spiegel J, Stram J, Devaiah A.Antibiotic prophy-
laxis in the management of complex midface and frontal sinus trauma. Laryngoscope. 2010;120(10):1940–5.
Litvack ZN, Hunt MA, Weinstein JS, West GA. Self-inicted nail-
gun injury with 12 cranial penetrations and associated cerebral trauma. Case report and review of the literature. J Neurosurg. 2006;104(5):828–34.
Low GM, Inaba K, Chouliaras K, Branco B, Lam L, Benjamin E,
Menaker J, Demetriades D. The use of the anatomic ‘zones’ of the neck in the assessment of penetrating neck injury. Am Surg. 2014;80(10):970–4. PMID: 25264641
Madsen AS, Bruce JL, Oosthuizen GV, Bekker W, Smith M, Manchev
V, Laing GL, Clarke DL. Correlation between the level of the external wound and the internal injury in penetrating neck injury does not favour an initial zonal management approach. BJS Open. 2020;4(4):704–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50282. Epub 2020 Jun 11
Madsen AS, Kong VY, Oosthuizen GV, Bruce JL, Laing GL, Clarke
DL. Computed tomography angiography is the denitive vas-
cular imaging modality for penetrating neck injury: a south African experience. Scand J Surg. 2018;107(1):23–30. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1457496917731187. Epub 2017 Sep 27
Madsen AS, Oosthuizen G, Laing GL, Bruce JL, Clarke DL.The role
of computed tomography angiography in the detection of aerodi­gestive tract injury following penetrating neck injury. J Surg Res. 2016;205(2):490–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.044. Epub 2016 Jun 27. PMID: 27664900
Majors JS, Brennan J, Holt GR. Management of High-Velocity
Injuries of the head and neck. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2017;25(4):493–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsc.2017.06.003. Epub 2017 Aug 25
Maras D, Lioupis C, Magous G, Tsamopoulos N, Moulakakis K,
Andrikopoulos V.Covered stent-graft treatment of traumatic inter­nal carotid artery pseudoaneurysms: a review. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2006;29(6):958–68.
Marut D, Shammassian B, McKenzie C, Adamski J, Traeger
J.Evaluation of prophylactic antibiotics in penetrating brain inju­ries at an academic level 1 trauma center. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020;193:105777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105777. Epub 2020 Mar 4
Mathisen DJ, Grillo H. Laryngotracheal trauma. Ann Thorac Surg.
1987;43(3):254–62.
Morales-Uribe C, Ramírez A, Suarez-Poveda T, Ortiz M, Sanabria
A. Diagnostic performance of CT angiography in neck ves­sel trauma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Emerg Radiol. 2016;23(5):421–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140- 016- 1412- 3. Epub 2016 Jun 1
Mort TC.Emergency tracheal intubation: complications associated with
repeated laryngoscopic attempts. Anesth Analg. 2004;99(2):607– 13, table of contents
Múnera F, Soto JA, Palacio DM, Castañeda J, Morales C, Sanabria A,
etal. Penetrating neck injuries: helical CT angiography for initial evaluation. Radiology. 2002;224(2):366–72.
Múnera F, Soto JA, Palacio D, Velez SM, Medina E.Diagnosis of arte-
rial injuries caused by penetrating trauma to the neck: comparison of helical CT angiography and conventional angiography. Radiology. 2000;216(2):356–62.
Murano T, Mohr AM, Lavery RF, Lynch C, Homnick AT, Livingston
DH.Civilian craniocerebral gunshot wounds: an update in predict­ing outcomes. Am Surg. 2005;71(12):1009–14.
Nakstad AR, Bredmose PP, Sandberg M.Comparison of a percutaneous
device and the bougie-assisted surgical technique for emergency cri­cothyrotomy: an experimental study on a porcine model performed by air ambulance anaesthesiologists. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013;21:59.
Nowicki JL, Stew B, Ooi E. Penetrating neck injuries: a guide
to evaluation and management. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018;100(1):6–11. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2017.0191. Epub 2017 Oct 19
Osborn TM, Bell RB, Qaisi W, Long WB.Computed tomographic angi-
ography as an aid to clinical decision making in the selective man­agement of penetrating injuries to the neck: a reduction in the need for operative exploration. J Trauma. 2008;64(6):1466–71.
Paladino L, Baron BJ, Shan G, Sinert R.Computed tomography angi-
ography for aerodigestive injuries in penetrating neck trauma: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med. 2021;28(10):1160–72. https://
doi.org/10.1111/acem.14298. Epub 2021 Sep 28
PROGNOSTIC INDICATORS. J Trauma. 2001;51(2):S50. Cited
in: Journals@Ovid Full Text at http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovid-
web.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=ovfte&NEWS=N &AN=00005373-200108001-00012. Accessed December 02, 2023.
Part 2: Prognosis in penetrating brain injury. J Trauma. 2001;51(2
Suppl):S44–86.
Rosenwasser RH, Andrews DW, Jimenez DF.Penetrating craniocere-
bral trauma. Surg Clin North Am. 1991;71(2):305–16.
258
https://t.me/medicina_free
N. Wall et al.
Sarnaik AP, Kopec J, Moylan P, Alvarez D, Canady A.Role of aggres-
sive intracranial pressure control in management of pediatric cra­niocerebral gunshot wounds with unfavorable features. J Trauma. 1989;29(10):1434–7.
Schade K, Borzotta A, Michaels A. Intracranial malposition of naso-
pharyngeal airway. J Trauma. 2000;49(5):967–8.
Schroll R, Fontenot T, Lipcsey M, Heaney JB, Marr A, Meade P,
McSwain N, Duchesne J. Role of computed tomography angi­ography in the management of zone II penetrating neck trauma in patients with clinical hard signs. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;79(6):943–50; ; discussion 950. https://doi.org/10.1097/
TA.0000000000000713.
Shiroff AM, Gale SC, Martin ND, Marchalik D, Petrov D, Ahmed
HM, Rotondo MF, Gracias VH. Penetrating neck trauma: a review of management strategies and discussion of the ‘no zone’ approach. Am Surg. 2013;79(1):23–9. https://doi.
org/10.1177/000313481307900113.
Sperry JL, Moore EE, Coimbra R, Croce M, Davis JW, Karmy-Jones R,
etal. Western Trauma association critical decisions in trauma: pene­trating neck trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;75(6):936–40.
Srinivasan R, Haywood T, Horwitz B, Buckman RF, Fisher RS,
Krevsky B.Role of exible endoscopy in the evaluation of possible esophageal trauma after penetrating injuries. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95(7):1725–9.
Sunshine K, Penuela M, Defta D, Herring E, Sajatovic M, Trager J,
etal. Antibiotic prophylaxis in penetrating brain injury: a system­atic review of the literature. Neurosurgery. 2020;67:1. https://doi.
org/10.1093/neuros/nyaa447_429.
Surgical management of penetrating brain injury. J Trauma. 2001;51(2
Suppl):S16–25.
Tisherman SA, Bokhari F, Collier B, Cumming J, Ebert J, Holevar M,
etal. Clinical practice guideline: penetrating zone II neck trauma. J Trauma. 2008;64:1392–405.
Trauma ACOSCO, Acs. Advanced trauma life support. 9th ed. Chicago,
IL: American College of Surgeons; 2012. p.1.
Tung TC, Tseng WS, Chen CT, Lai JP, Chen YR.Acute life- threatening
injuries in facial fracture patients: a review of 1,025 patients. J Trauma. 2000;49(3):420–4.
Ueeck BA. Penetrating injuries to the face: delayed versus primary
treatment– considerations for delayed treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(6):1209–14.
Unger SW, Tucker WS, Mrdeza MA, Wellons HA, Chandler JG.Carotid
arterial trauma Surgery. 1980;87(5):477–87.
Vassiliu P, Baker J, Henderson S, Alo K, Velmahos G, Demetriades
D.Aerodigestive injuries of the neck. Am Surg. 2001;67(1):75–9.
Weigelt JA, Thal ER, Snyder WH, Fry RE, Meier DE, Kilman
WJ. Diagnosis of penetrating cervical esophageal injuries. Am J Surg. 1987;154(6):619–22.
Weppner J. Improved mortality from penetrating neck and maxillofa-
cial trauma using Foley catheter balloon tamponade in combat. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;75(2):220–4.
Zosa BM, Elliott CW, Kurlander DE, Johnson F, Ho VP, Claridge
JA. Facing the facts on prophylactic antibiotics for facial frac­tures: 1day or less. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018;85(3):444–50.
https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000002009.
Zosa BM, Ladhani HA, Sajankila N, Elliott CW, Claridge JA. Pre-
operative antibiotic agents for facial fractures: is more than one day necessary? Surg Infect. 2021;22(5):516–22. https://doi.org/10.1089/
sur.2020.036. Epub 2020 Oct 9
Penetrating Injuries oftheFace
https://t.me/medicina_free
RizanNashef andThomasB.Dodson
30
The reported frequencies of penetrating maxillofacial inju­ries in the English literature range from 14% to 52%. The wide range in reported frequencies is a function of the insti­tution’s location and referral patterns. Level 1 emergency departments (EDs) located in an urban environment and military units are more likely to see a large volume of pene­trating injuries compared to lower-level EDs or those located distant from urban environments.
30.1 Types andCharacteristics ofInjuries
Penetrating injuries occur when objects, e.g., a missile or knife, violate skin or mucosal barriers and enter the body and are classied as high energy (missile such as a bullet
or shrapnel) or low energy (knife). High-energy penetrat­ing injuries produce avulsion injuries associated with loss of both soft and hard tissues, producing a composite defect (Fig.30.1a and b). Composite defect wounds are complex wounds to manage acutely and commonly require secondary reconstruction. Internal xation devices to stabilize bony segments or replace missing bony struc­tures, prudent preservation of the soft tissue, and the use of advancement aps can produce excellent anatomic res­toration of form.
Low-energy penetrating injuries, such as a knife, machete,
or other sharp objects, result in isolated damage to the soft tissue or a combination of damage to the soft tissue and facial fractures, generally with preservation of soft and hard tissue masses (Fig.30.2a and b).
R. Nashef Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
T. B. Dodson (*) Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Washington School of Dentistry, Seattle, WA, USA e-mail: tbdodson@uw.edu
© 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_30
259
260
https://t.me/medicina_free
R. Nashef and T. B. Dodson
ab
c d
Fig. 30.1 (a) Clinical picture of a high-energy penetrating injury. Notice the avulsion injury producing a composite defect characterized by loss of both soft and hard tissues. (b) CT demonstrating the hard tissue damage caused by high-velocity penetrating injury. (c) Clinical
picture of the same patient after treatment which includes restoring facial form. (d) CT scan demonstrating reduction and xation of facial fractures with restoration of facial form
ab
30 Penetrating Injuries oftheFace
https://t.me/medicina_free
261
Fig. 30.2 (a) Low-energy penetrating injury results in isolated damage to the soft tissue. (b) Notice the preservation of soft tissue mass after repair
30.2 Structures at Risk forInjury
Maxillofacial injuries, while not generally life threatening, present challenging problems to trauma surgeons because of the concentration of complex, vital anatomic structures with their associated functions. These structures include the brain with its 12 cranial nerves, 4 of the 5 senses, the airway, an intricate bone conguration, the cervical spine, the major blood vessels, the salivary glands, and the centers for speech and deglutition. In addition, the face has an important esthetic component that affects patients’ self-worth and psychologi­cal well-being.
30.3 Goals ofManagement
Penetrating maxillofacial injuries do not usually create major resuscitation challenges. As such, immediate attention needs to be directed toward evaluating and managing the airway and bleeding. After the patient is stabilized, the long-term treatment objectives are to restore facial form and function (Fig.30.1c and d), while preventing or minimizing compli­cations, e.g., infection, inadvertent damage to the facial nerve, or discarding valuable soft or hard tissue structures.
The purpose of this chapter is to highlight the principles
of evaluation and management of patients with penetrating maxillofacial injuries focusing on the acute management skills required by the trauma surgeon and the latter manage­ment issues addressed by the specialty service.
30.4 Acute Management
30.4.1 Patient Evaluation
Most maxillofacial injuries are not life-threatening and are usually evaluated as a component of the secondary trauma survey. Airway and bleeding, however, require immediate evaluation and control. Simultaneously, the clinician must avoid unnecessary manipulation of the neck pending cervical spine clearance. Ten percent of facial penetrating injuries associated with a motor vehicle collision (MVC) or fall from height have associated cervical spine injuries.
Other potential complications initiated during the initial
evaluation and management are due to inappropriate man­agement of the maxillofacial soft and hard tissues. For exam­ple, careless vessel clamping and ligation while trying to obtain homeostasis may result in facial nerve damage. Direct
262
https://t.me/medicina_free
R. Nashef and T. B. Dodson
a
b
Fig. 30.3 Frontal repose view of frontal bone deformity as a result of discarded hard tissue at the time of neurosurgical treatment
pressure often provides adequate homeostasis. Discarding nearly avulsed tissues, especially those involving the eyelid, may result in soft tissue defects that are challenging to cor­rect. Discarding fracture segments could impair subsequent early or late treatment (Fig.30.3).
30.5 Airway Management
Airway control is a priority. Obstruction may be due to for­eign bodies, e.g., dentures, teeth, uids (blood or vomit), soft tissue (tongue or loss of tongue support due to a mandible fracture), or direct laryngeal injury. While assessing the air­way, bleeding from maxillofacial injuries can be managed acutely with pressure and local hemostatic measures.
Primary airway management is a core competency of the trauma surgeon and addressed in detail elsewhere in text. There are a few considerations worth noting when managing the airway of patients with maxillofacial injuries. Usually, the initial airway control is by endotracheal intubation or performance of a surgical airway. With few exceptions, at a later stage and depending on oral endotracheal tube that needs to be converted to the maxillofacial operative proce-
Fig. 30.4 (a) Extraoral and (b) intraoral views of submental intuba- tion. Arrow points to endotracheal tube as it enters the oor of the mouth
dure, the orotracheal intubation is changed to nasotracheal or converted to tracheostomy. Occasionally, maxillofacial sur­geons can work around an oral airway or may elect to per­form submental intubation (Fig.30.4a and b).
30.6 Evaluation andManagement ofMaxillofacial Bleeding
Penetrating injuries of the face may bleed profusely due to the highly vascular nature of this region. The corollary of this is that injuries to hard or soft tissues are more likely to sur­vive and be resistant to infection. Many times, because of the copious blood supply and relatively small wounds, maxillo­facial injuries appear serious. As such, it is critical to clean the wounds, to establish the nature and severity of the inju­ries, and to identify and control bleeding sources. Magnication (loupes) and illumination (headlights) are invaluable to assist in identifying and controlling bleeding. Direct pressure is effective for controlling bleeding from facial injuries. The wounds can be cleaned efciently with sponges soaked in saline or dilute hydrogen peroxide.
ab
30 Penetrating Injuries oftheFace
https://t.me/medicina_free
263
Fig. 30.5 (a) Typical blunt midface injury demonstrating stabilization of the neck with a cervical collar, oral intubation, facial edema, perior­bital ecchymoses, and posterior nasal pack (Foley catheter) and anterior nasal pack to control nasal bleeding. Marked facial edema develops
Nasal injuries associated with bleeding are common and can be challenging to manage. Injury of Kiesselbach’s plexus accounts for nasal bleeding in 90% of the cases. Nasal bleed-
within a few hours of injury, making the physical examination more difcult. (b) Same patient few days later. Notice the decreased swelling allows better delineation of the deformity and facilitates operative repair of the injuries
Management of the maxillofacial bleeding can be achieved by any one or a combination of the following options:
ing can be caused by laceration of the nasal mucosa, and any of the nasal vessels can be the source of the bleeding. Since the branches of the internal maxillary artery and the anterior and posterior ethmoidal arteries are located in the posterior aspect of the nose, it is most likely that these vessels will cause posterior bleeding toward the pharynx and anterior packing of the nose or packing of the oral cavity is ineffec­tive. As such, posterior nasal packing is indicated. Posterior packing consists of placing a Foley catheter into the far pos­terior portion of the nasal cavity and then inserting an ante­rior nasal pack in front of the balloon. The posterior pack is maintained for 1–3days (Fig.30.5a).
Nasal septal hematomas are associated with septal frac­tures. Septal hematomas need to be diagnosed and managed efciently. Left untreated, a septal hematoma may produce necrosis of the underlying cartilage, producing a nasal defor­mity characterized by collapse of the nasal dorsum and may be very difcult to correct.
1. Direct pressure:
• Bleeding from maxillofacial injuries responds well to direct pressure. Use dry sponges and abdominal swabs, and press on the bleeding site to produce pressure hemostasis (Fig.30.6).
2. Ligation:
• Ligating vessels is done in the usual manner; however, avoid blind clamping of tissues to prevent iatrogenic injury to vital structures such as the facial nerve.
3. Hemostatic agents:
• Incremental measures to obtain homeostasis include packing with hemostatic agents, e.g., oxidized cellu­lose, microbrillar collagen, and chitosan-based hemostatic dressing.
4. Interventional radiology:
• Occasionally, bleeding from the nose and infratempo­ral fossa or indeterminate, profuse maxillofacial
264
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 30.6 Hemostasis obtained by packing the wound with sponges
bleeding cannot be controlled with usual methods. Under these circumstances, consider consultation with interventional radiology for diagnostic angiography and embolization.
R. Nashef and T. B. Dodson
underlying injuries, making physical identication of inju­ries more difcult (Fig.30.5a).
Inspect the scalp and face for obvious lacerations or deformities. Probe the laceration to determine if it communi­cates with the underling bony structures. Assess facial nerve function by asking patients to raise their eyebrows, squeeze their eyes shut, smile, pucker their lips, and grimace. Lacerations posterior to a line dropped perpendicular to the horizontal at the lateral canthus of the eye increase the risk for a facial nerve or salivary duct injury (Fig.30.7).
Gently stroke the forehead, infraorbital region, and lower lip to assess trigeminal nerve sensory function. Abnormal sensation suggests a facial bone fracture due to injury to a trigeminal nerve branch.
Palpate the supraorbital, lateral, and infraorbital rims to identify periorbital or zygomatic fractures as evidenced by bony steps or pain. Examine the nasal bridge and look for deviation of the nose or deformity. Place your nondominant hand on the patient’s forehead to stabilize the head, and using your dominant hand, place your index and the thumb ngers over the nasal bridge, and assess stability by trying to move it side to side (Fig.30.8). Using a headlight and a nasal speculum, perform an intranasal examination. Inspect the nasal septum for evidence of deformity or deviation of the
30.7 History andPhysical Examination ofMaxillofacial Injuries
In most cases, evaluating maxillofacial injuries is a compo­nent of the secondary trauma survey. Historical information regarding the mechanism of injury, timing, and location of injury can be valuable. Unless the patient is awake and ori­ented, these data are best collected from witnesses of the incident. Medical history may be important, and family members are helpful with an unconscious or intubated patient. The simplest way to ascertain quickly if there is a fracture of the maxilla or mandible is to ask patients if their bite is altered. If the answer is yes, there is a high likelihood of a fracture. If the answer is no, there is a low likelihood of fracture. The following paragraphs outline a method for completing the initial examination for maxillofacial injuries.
30.8 External Examination
The goal of the examination is to determine quickly and ef­ciently the presence or absence of maxillofacial injuries. Edema develops within a few hours after injury, masking
Fig. 30.7 Lacerations located posterior to the line dropped perpen­dicular to the horizontal at the lateral canthus of the eye are associated with an increased risk for a facial nerve or salivary duct injury
septum and a septal hematoma.