ArticleMilitary medicine2018
Characteristics of Combat-Associated Small Bowel Injuries.
Article in Military medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for abdominal surgical site infection after exploratory laparotomy among combat casualties.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2021Article
- Damage control surgical management of combined small and large bowel injuries in penetrating trauma: Are ostomies still pertinent?Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia) · 2021Observational
- Outcomes of Exploratory Laparotomy and Abdominal Infections Among Combat Casualties.The Journal of surgical research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAlthough there are multiple studies regarding the management and outcomes of colonic injuries incurred in combat, the literature is limited with regard to small bowel injuries. This study seeks to provide the largest reported review of the characteristics of combat-associated small bowel injuries. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe Department of Defense Trauma Registry was queried for U.S. Armed Forces members who sustained hollow viscus injuries in the years 2007-2012 during Operations Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom, and New Dawn. Concomitant injuries, procedures, and complications were delineated. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze the relationship of bowel injury pattern to rates of repeat laparotomy, fecal diversion, and complications.
resultsOne hundred seventy-one service members had small bowel injuries. The mean age was 25.8 ± 6.6 yr with a mean injury severity score of 27.9 ± 12.4. The majority of injuries were penetrating (94.2%, n = 161) as a result of explosive devices (61.4%, n = 105). The median blood transfusion requirement in the first 24 h was 6.0 units (interquartile range 1.0-17.3 units). The most frequent concomitant injuries were large bowel (64.3%, n = 110), pelvic fracture (35.7%, n = 61), and perineal (26.3%, n = 45). Fifty patients (29.2%) had a colostomy, and nine patients (5.3%) had an ileostomy; 62.6% (n = 107) of soldiers underwent more than one laparotomy. The mortality rate was 1.8% (n = 3). The most common complications were pneumonia (15.2%, n = 26), deep vein thrombosis (14.6%, n = 25), and wound infection (14.6%, n = 25). The need for repeat laparotomy and fecal diversion was found to be significantly associated with injury pattern (p = 0.00052 and p < 0.0001, respectively).
conclusionWe found that two-thirds of service members with small bowel injuries also had a large bowel injury. One-third of the patients required diversion and two-thirds had more than one laparotomy. The pattern of bowel injury significantly affected the need for repeat laparotomy and fecal diversion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.