Table 2.
Comparing grades (AAST grade based on CT and OR findings)
| Grade I(n = 9) | Grade II(n = 21) | Grade III(n = 7) | Grade IV(n = 6) | Grade V(n = 3) | Correlationcoefficient (rs) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | ||||||
| S-NOM | 6 (67%) | 15 (71%) | 6 (86%) | 4 (67%) | 0 | a |
| OM | 3 (33%) | 3 (14%) | 1 (14%) | 2 (33%) | 2 (67%) | a |
| FNOM | 0 | 3 (14%) | 0 | 0 | 1 (33%) | a |
| Demographics | ||||||
| Age | 41 ± 24 | 33 ± 17 | 33 ± 17 | 26 ± 12 | 23 ± 12 | NS |
| Male | 2 (22%) | 13 (62%) | 1 (14%) | 2 (33%) | 0 | a |
| Haemodynamics in the ER | ||||||
| First sBT | 122 ± 32 | 125 ± 26 | 122 ± 26 | 118 ± 22 | 90 ± 10 | NS |
| Instability | 1 (11%) | 5 (24%) | 1 (14%) | 2 (33%) | 2 (67%) | a |
| Extent of damage | ||||||
| ISS | 14 ± 11 | 14 ± 14 | 13 ± 3 | 25 ± 11 | 37 ± 7 | 0.4** |
| Haemoperitoneumb | 0.5 (0–3) | 1 (0–3) | 3 (1–3) | 3 (2.5–3) | 3 (3–3) | 0.4** |
| Hospital stay | ||||||
| ICU days | 1 ± 3 | 4 ± 7 | 3 ± 2 | 6 ± 5 | 6 ± 4 | NS |
| SW days | 9 ± 7 | 13 ± 13 | 19 ± 14 | 20 ± 6 | 43 ± 48 | 0.4** |
| Total LOS | 10 ± 6 | 17 ± 19 | 23 ± 16 | 26 ± 10 | 49 ± 50 | 0.4** |
| Transfusion requirements | ||||||
| Patients receiving B-Tx | 4 (44%) | 5 (24%) | 3 (43%) | 5 (83%) | 3 (100%) | a |
| Blood Tx | 1 ± 1 | 9 ± 19 | 8 ± 19 | 8 ± 9 | 41 ± 24 | 0.4* |
| Outcome | ||||||
| Complications | 0 | 8 (38%) | 4 (57%) | 4 (67%) | 3 (100%) | a |
| Mortality | 0 | 1 (5%) | 0 | 0 | 1 (33%) | a |
ER, emergency room; sBP, systolic blood-pressure; ISS, injury severity score; ICU, intensive care unit; SW, surgical ward; LOS, length of stay; Tx, transfusion requirements; B-Tx, blood transfusion requirements.
*
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
***Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed). NS, not significant.
a
Test could not be performed as the variable is in nominal scale.
b
Numbers presented as mean ± SD, number of patients (% of total) or median (interquartile range).