Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of the 36 cohort studies included in the systematic review

From: Evidence for use of damage control surgery and damage control interventions in civilian trauma patients: a systematic review

Source Prospective No. centers Country Trauma Patients No. indications
No. Mean age, yr. % blunt MOI Mean ISS Score Predominant trauma surgical intervention(s) performeda (%)
Watson et al. 2017 [15] Yes 12 U.S.A. 329 32.0b 42 26.0b DC laparotomy (65) or definitive surgery (35) 2
Harvin et al. 2016 [38] No 1 U.S.A. 222 33.6 66 28.7 DC (65) or definitive (35) laparotomy 6
Savage et al. 2014 [39] No 1 U.S.A. 169 40.2 65 NISS, 21.1 DC (22) or definitive (78) laparotomy 2
Ordoñez et al. 2014 [40] No 1 Colombia 36 26b 0 25b DC (81) or definitive (19) laparotomy for complex penetrating duodenal injuries 1
Mahmood et al. 2014 [41] Yes 1 Qatar 117 35 92 23 DC (13) or definitive (87) laparotomy 5
Thompson et al. 2013 [42] No 1 U.S.A. 15 29b 33 35d DC laparotomy with or without the first stage of a Whipple procedure (80) versus a complete Whipple procedure at the index operation (20) 1
Rice et al. 2012 [43] Yes 100 26 countries 556 38.1 85 NR DC or definitive surgery (percentages unclear) 3
Martin et al. 2012 [14] No 1 U.S.A. 628 34.5 45 17.8 DC (10) or definitive (90) laparotomy 3
Chinnery et al. 2012 [44] No 1 South Africa 219 26b 0 NR DC (20) or definitive (80) laparotomy 1
Mayberry et al. 2011 [45] No 1 U.S.A. 41 34 46 24 DC (61) or definitive (39) laparotomy for full-thickness duodenal lacerations 1
Liu et al. 2011 [24] No 1 China 104 31.1 84 NR DC (44) or definitive (56) laparotomy 4
Leppäniemi et al. 2011 [46] No 2 Finland 144 33 94 31 DC (15) or definitive (20) laparotomy for major liver injury 1
Timmermans et al. 2010 [47] No 1 South Africa 74 28 19 NR DC laparotomy (100) 3
Matsumoto et al. 2010 [48] No 1 Japan 34 51.9 97 35.6 DC laparotomy (100)c 6
Kairinos et al. 2010 [49] No 1 South Africa 145 NR NR NR DC laparotomy (100) 1
Yu et al. 2009 [25] No 1 China 90 NR NR 35 DC (50) or definitive (50) surgery 7
Kashuk et al. 2008 [50] No 1 U.S.A. 133 34.9 NR 35.9 NR 4
MacKenzie et al. 2004 [51] No 1 Canada 37 NR 84 NR Laparotomy with early therapeutic perihepatic packing followed by angioembolization (19) or definitive laparotomy (81) for AAST grade IV-V liver injuriesd 1
Asensio et al. 2004 [52] Mixed 1 U.S.A. 139 33.2 28 24.0 DC laparotomy (100) 6
Aucar et al. 2003 [53] Yes 1 U.S.A. 31 NR NR NR DC (23) or definitive (77) operative techniques for patients with chest, abdomen, or extremity vessel injuries 3
Asensio et al. 2003 [54] No 1 U.S.A. 148 27.0 5 20.0 DC (18) or definitive (82) laparotomy for iliac vessel injuries 4
Hirshberg et al. 2002 [55] Mixed 1 U.S.A. 346 NR 0 NR DC (16) or definitive (84) laparotomy 2
Apartsin et al. 2002 [23] No 1 Russia 150 NR NR NR DC (51) or definitive (49) laparotomy 2
Asensio et al. 2001 [56] No 1 U.S.A. 548 30 18 32 DC laparotomy (100) 6
Krishna et al. 1998 [57] No 1 New Zealand 40 38.2 NR >35 Definitive thoracotomy (10) and/or laparotomy (93) 3
Carrillo et al. 1998 [58] No 1 U.S.A. 64 36 0 NR DC (22) or definitive (78) laparotomy for iliac vessel injuries 6
Cushman et al. 1997 [59] No 1 U.S.A. 53 29 5 NR DC (17) or definitive (83) laparotomy for iliac vessel injuries 6
Cosgriff et al. 1997 [60] Yes 1 U.S.A. 58 35.4 47 30.6 DC (31) or definitive (69) laparotomy 4
Garrison et al. 1996 [61] No 1 U.S.A. 70 41 70 35.3 DC laparotomy with therapeutic intra-abdominal packing (100) 7
Rotondo et al. 1993 [62] No 1 U.S.A. 46 31.0 0 23.6 DC (52) or definitive (48) laparotomy 1
Sharp and Locicero 1992 [63] No 1 U.S.A. 39 33.9 80 37.9 DC laparotomy with therapeutic intra-abdominal packing (100) 6
Rutherford et al. 1992 [64] No 1 U.S.A. 3038 NR 85 NR NR 3
Burch et al. 1992 [65] No 1 U.S.A. 200 31 15 NR DC laparotomy (100) 2
Cué et al. 1990 [66] No 1 U.S.A. 35 35 71 41 Laparotomy (100) with packing of major liver injuries (89) or severe retroperitoneal hemorrhage (11) 1
Carmona et al. 1984 [67] No 1 U.S.A. 31 30e 53e NR Laparotomy with perihepatic packing (55) or simple repair (45) of major liver injuries (55) 1
Stone et al. 1983 [68] No 1 U.S.A. 31 28 6 NR DC (55) or definitive (45) laparotomy 1
  1. Where AAST indicates American Association for the Surgery of Trauma; d, day(s); DC, damage control; ED, Emergency Department; ICU, Intensive Care Unit; intraop, intraoperative; ISS, Injury Severity Scale; MSK, musculoskeletal/extremity; NA, not applicable; NISS, New Injury Severity Scale score; NR, not reported; OR, operating room; preop, preoperative; pro, prospective; ret, retrospective; RR, response rate; TAC, temporary abdominal closure; and yr, years.
  2. aExcluding orthopedic and neurological surgery
  3. bValue represents a median instead of a mean
  4. cIn this study, 16 (47%) of the 34 patients who underwent DC laparotomy had their procedure performed in the ED
  5. dIn this study 15 of the patients in the definitive laparotomy group were reported to ultimately need abdominal packing after conventional hepatic injury repair techniques. Moreover, 1 patient in the early therapeutic packing group received angiography before laparotomy
  6. eEstimate relates to the 17 patients who were managed with therapeutic perihepatic packing