Prevention of complications from the laparotomy wound in abdominal gunshot injury

The OBJECTIVE was to evaluate the effectiveness of the original technique for assessing the reparative potential of the anterior abdominal wall in the prevention of complications from the laparotomic wound in abdominal gunshot injury.

METHODS AND MATERIALS. The comparative assessment of the results of surgical treatment of 145 victims with abdominal gunshot injury, which were divided into 2 groups, was made. The retrospective group included 92 patients who underwent a standard approach to the prevention of infectious complications in the surgical area: perioperative administration of antibiotics, daily dressings, as well as laboratory monitoring of acute phase parameters and instrumental assessment of tissue condition (ultrasound). The prospective group was formed from 53 patients in whom, as part of the prevention of the infectious process, the original method for assessing the reparative potential of the tissues of the anterior abdominal wall was used (priority certificate for the invention ¹ 2023109198 dated 04/12/2023). The studied groups were comparable in terms of the main clinical criteria: the age of the victims, the severity of injuries, and the structure of surgical interventions.

RESULTS. Suppuration of the laparotomic wound was noted in 22 patients in the retrospective group and in 4 in the prospective group, which accounted for 23.9 % and 7.5 % of their number (p=0.014). Eventration was observed in 11 patients in the retrospective group and in one patient in the prospective group (11.9 % and 1.9 %, p=0.05).

CONCLUSION. The use of the original technique for assessing the reparative potential of the tissues of the anterior abdominal wall makes it possible to reduce the incidence of complications from the laparotomic wound in abdominal gunshot injury.

1. Alisov P. G., Samohvalov I. M. Gunshot wounds of the abdomen. Features, diagnosis and treatment in modern conditions. SPb., Sintez Book, 2018:320. (In Russ.).

2. Jeffery S. The management of combat wounds: the British military experience // Adv. Wound Care. 2016;5(10):464–473.

3. Livingston D. H., Lavery R. F., Lopreiato M. C. et al. Unrelenting violence: an analysis of 6,322 gunshot wound patients at a Level I trauma center // J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76(1):2–9.

4. Minnullin I. P., Magamadov A. H., Taranov I. I. Explosive abdominal injuries. SPb., SpecLit, 2022:191. (In Russ.).

5. Waibel B. H., Rotondo M. Damage control surgery: it’s evolution over the last 20 years // Rev. Col. Bras. Cir. 2012;39(4):314–321.

6. Du Bose J. J. Open abdominal management after damage-control laparotomy for trauma: A prospective observational American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter study // J. Trauma. 2013;74(1):113–122.

7. Samohvalov I. M., Koskin V. S., Petrov A. N., Rud’ A. A. Analysis of modern systems for the prevention of wound infection in the injured // Kremlin medicine clinical bulletin. 2015;(2):161–167. (In Russ.).

8. Trukhan A. P., Samokhvalov I. M., Vasiliev D. V., Sukharev A. A. Experience of the application of vacuum therapy in the treatment of gunshot and explosive wounds of peacetime // Surgery. Eastern Europe. 2020;9(4):402–410. (In Russ.).

9. Janssen A. H., Johannes A. W., De Vries Reilingh T. S. Negative pressure wound therapy for patients with hard-to heal wounds: a systematic review // J. Wound Care. 2020;29(4):206–212.

10. Li H. Z., Xu X. H., Wang D. W. et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials // Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2019;25(11):1328–1338.

11. Ge D. The safety of negative-pressure wound therapy on surgical wounds: an updated meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials // Adv. Skin Wound Care. 2018;31(9):421–428.

12.