These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Open versus closed diagnostic peritoneal lavage in the evaluation of abdominal trauma.
    Author: Lopez-Viego MA, Mickel TJ, Weigelt JA.
    Journal: Am J Surg; 1990 Dec; 160(6):594-6; discussion 596-7. PubMed ID: 2252119.
    Abstract:
    Two hundred forty-two patients underwent diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) over a 12-month period. One hundred sixteen patients (48%) were randomized to an open lavage technique and 126 (52%) to a percutaneous (closed) guide wire procedure. The closed procedure required an average of 16 minutes to complete with one operator, whereas the open method required two operators and an average time of 26 minutes (p less than 0.001). Technical complications occurred in 31 patients undergoing closed lavage (25%) and 4 patients undergoing open lavage (3%) (p less than 0.01). Fifty-eight percent of the closed lavage complications were related to fluid return and 42% to guide wire placement. All the open lavage complications were caused by inadequate fluid return. These data do not support the initial use of percutaneous lavage. The open technique is favored and certainly used when the closed method fails or when direct visualization of the peritoneal cavity is indicated. Physicians involved in the management of abdominal trauma must be familiar with both methods of DPL.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]