Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37330406›Full record

ReviewInjury2023

Negative laparotomy rates and outcomes following blunt traumatic injury in the United States.

Kathryn Atkins, Andrew Schneider, Anthony Charles

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Injury, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Patterns of negative trauma laparotomy worldwide: a sub-analysis of a global dataset.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Influence of Australasian Triage Scale on time to CT for major trauma patients: a Western Australian level 1 trauma centre experience.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. CT scanning and questions about benefit versus risk.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kathryn AtkinsDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.
Andrew SchneiderDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.
Anthony CharlesDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA. Electronic address: anthchar@med.unc.edu.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

TRAUMA RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPT32GM008450 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Bruce A Cairns, Anthony G Charles · 1992 to 2026
$3.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionExploratory laparotomy remains the mainstay of treatment following blunt abdominal trauma. However, the decision to operate can be difficult in hemodynamically stable patients with unreliable physical exams or equivocal imaging findings. The risk of a negative laparotomy and the subsequent complications must be weighed against the potential morbidity and mortality of a missed abdominal injury. Our study aims to evaluate trends and the effect of negative laparotomies on morbidity and mortality in adults with blunt traumatic injuries in the United States.

methodsWe reviewed the National Trauma Data Bank (2007-2019) for adults with blunt traumatic injuries who underwent an exploratory laparotomy. Positive or negative laparotomy of abdominal injury was compared. We performed bivariate analysis and a modified Poisson regression to estimate the effect of negative laparotomy on mortality. A sub-analysis of patients who underwent computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen and pelvis was performed.

results92,800 patients met the inclusion criteria of the primary analysis. Negative laparotomy rates were 12.0% in this population, down-trending throughout the study. Negative laparotomy patients had a significantly higher crude mortality (31.1% vs. 20.5%, p < 0.001), despite lower injury severity scores (20 (10-29) vs. 25 (16-35), p < 0.001) than positive laparotomy patients. Patients that underwent negative laparotomy had a 33% higher risk for mortality (RR1.33, 95% CI 1.28-1.37, P < 0.001) than positive laparotomy patients after adjusting for pertinent covariates. Patients that underwent CT abdomen/pelvis imaging (n = 45,654) had a lower rate of negative laparotomy (11.1%) and decreased difference in crude mortality (22.6% vs. 14.1%, p < 0.001) compared to positive laparotomy patients. However, the relative risk for mortality remained high at 37% (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.29 - 1.46, p < 0.001) for this sub-cohort.

conclusionNegative laparotomy rates in adults with blunt traumatic injuries are trending down in the United States but remains substantial and may show improvement with increased use of diagnostic imaging. Negative laparotomy has a relative risk for mortality of 33% despite lower injury severity. Thus, surgical exploration in this population should be thoughtfully undertaken with appropriate evaluation via physical exam and diagnostic imaging to prevent unnecessary morbidity and mortality.

Indexed as

Abdominal InjuriesWounds, NonpenetratingAdultHumansLaparotomyRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUnited StatesAbdominal injuryBlunt traumatic injuryExploratory laparotomyNegative laparotomy

Identifiers

PMID37330406
PMCPMC10526723
OpenAlexW4380786885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.