Abstract:Background: The treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries has changed in recent years with more focus on "nonoperative management" (NOM) to avoid unnecessary laparotomies while identifying injuries early. Although the NOM approach is widely used for stab wounds, its effectiveness in managing abdominal gunshot wounds is controversial. NOM of penetrating abdominal injuries is becoming more dependent on hemodynamic stability and improved noninvasive radiological interventions. The role of NOM is significantly underreported and underestimated in developing countries, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected states such as Yemen. The present study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of NOM in penetrating abdominal trauma injury patients and identify factors associated with NOM failure in a low-resource setting. Methods: A retrospective study from January 2021 to December 2022 including patients diagnosed with penetrating abdominal trauma at the General Military Hospital, Sana'a, Yemen, was conducted. Hemodynamically stable patients without peritonitis or clear indications for immediate laparotomy were candidates for NOM and were included in the study. Patients with blunt abdominal injuries, penetrating wounds outside the abdomen, particularly head injury, eviscerated structures, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or those pronounced dead on arrival were excluded. The primary outcome was the success and failure rate of NOM necessitating laparotomy. The secondary outcome was the factors associated with NOM failure. Results: During the study, 256 patients with penetrating abdominal injury were admitted, with 222 (86.7%) undergoing immediate laparotomy and 34 (13.3%) treated with NOM. The mean age was 27.6±7.4 years. Bump explosions, mostly sharp objects (secondary blast injuries), were the main causes of injury (n=18, 52.9%). Other causes were low-velocity gunshot wounds, stab wound injuries, and shotgun injuries in 14 (41.2%), one (2.9%), and one (2.9%), respectively. The majority of patients (n=25, 55.9%) were admitted within 6-24 hours of the incident. The abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan revealed various injuries in all patients, including hemoperitoneum in 11 (32.4%), pneumoperitoneum in five (14.7%), liver injury in 15 (44.1%), foreign body attached to the wall colon in 23 (67.6%), kidney injury in two (5.9%), and splenic injury in one (2.9%). NOM was successful in 31 (91.2%) patients. NOM failed in three (8.8%). One patient was treated via the laparoscopic procedure, and two patients were treated with laparotomy procedures. Five (14.7%) cases required intensive care unit (ICU) admission, with no deaths or major complications. In univariate analysis, the presence of free intra-abdominal fluid (pneumoperitoneum) on the initial CT scan and the need for ICU admission were associated with NOM failure and were statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: Our findings support that some penetrating abdominal trauma patients can benefit from NOM. The goal of preventing unnecessary laparotomies should be aligned with a comprehensive comprehension of the clinical signs and symptoms of NOM failure and the necessity for surgical intervention. Serial abdominal examinations remain the foundation of selected NOM; nevertheless, radiological and laboratory tests can be important tools in decision-making. In this study, free intra-abdominal fluid on the initial CT scan and the need for ICU admission were associated with NOM failure.

Analysis of Factors to Determine Treatment Methods for Abdominal Stab Wound Patients with Peritoneal Breach According to the Results of Diagnostic Laparotomy

To the point: Utility of laparoscopy for operative management of stabbing abdominal trauma

Outcomes of non-operative management of penetrating abdominal trauma

Outcomes of Nonoperative Management of Penetrating Abdominal Trauma Injury: A Retrospective Study

Role of laparoscopic surgery in managing hemodynamically stable abdominal trauma patients: a single level I trauma center, propensity score matching study

Diagnosis and Management of Colonic Injuries Following Blunt Trauma

Assessment of risk factors for enteric fistula and intra-abdominal sepsis in patients with open abdomen in trauma: An original research

Open or Not Open the Retroperitoneum: A Pandora's Box for Blunt High-Grade Pancreatic Trauma?

Laparoscopic exploration versus conservative treatment in stable blunt abdominal trauma patients

Laparoscopic surgery in abdominal trauma: a single center review of a 7-year experience

Point of care ultrasound and sub-xiphoid window reduce uncertainty in the management of potential dual-cavity injuries in patients with torso stab wounds

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the management of abdominal trauma

Intra-abdominal injury identified by CTA in stable blunt polytrauma patients

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Abdominal Trauma: A Case-Matched Study

Clinical predictors of intra-abdominal lesions in blunt abdominal trauma patients with the conservative treatment

Clinical outcomes in patients with complicated appendicitis

Clinical Diagnosis and Per-Operative Findings Non-Traumatic emergency Laparotomy-A Study of 200 Cases

Management Strategies for the Open Abdomen Following Damage Control Laparotomy

Comparison of Clinical Characteristics, Therapy, and Short-Term Prognosis between Blunt and Penetrating Abdominal Trauma: A Multicentric Retrospective Cohort Study

Lessons Learned in 11 Years of Experience With Open Abdomen Treatment With Negative-Pressure Therapy for Various Abdominal Emergencies

Acute Appendicitis Treatment Strategies and Mortality Based on Critical Illness on Admission: An Observational Study