Abstract
A retrospective non-randomized study, comparing primary repair with colostomy, was made on a series of 102 patients with penetrating intraperitoneal colon injuries, in a war surgery programme in Cambodia. The overall case fatality rate (CFR) was 25.5%, whereas in the primary repair group CFR was 20%, compared to 30.8% in the colostomy group. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.30). Adjustment for possible confounding factors in the two groups did not alter the results. Considering the numerous advantages to the patient of a primary closure in the precarious situations where war surgery is often performed, this technique merits consideration.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Garfinkle S. E., Cohen S. E., Matolo N. M., Getzen L. C., Wolfman E. F., Jr Civilian colonic injuries. Changing concepts of management. Arch Surg. 1974 Sep;109(3):402–404. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1974.01360030054015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shannon F. L., Moore E. E. Primary repair of the colon: when is it a safe alternative? Surgery. 1985 Oct;98(4):851–860. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stone H. H., Fabian T. C. Management of perforating colon trauma: randomization between primary closure and exteriorization. Ann Surg. 1979 Oct;190(4):430–436. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197910000-00002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]