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: Diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of rectal trauma. Blunt versus penetrating.
    Author: Brunner RG, Shatney CH.
    Journal: Am Surg; 1987 Apr; 53(4):215-9. PubMed ID: 3579027.
    Abstract:
    In the last 6 years, nine patients with blunt and 16 with penetrating rectal injuries were treated at University Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida. Blunt trauma was caused by vehicular accidents in seven patients and crush injuries in two. Penetrating rectal trauma was due to gunshot wounds in ten patients and foreign body insertion in six. All patients with blunt injury had bright red rectal bleeding, which led to diagnostic sigmoidoscopy. Rectal injury was identified at sigmoidoscopy in 12 patients who had penetrating wounds and at laparotomy in four patients. Thirteen patients who had penetrating rectal trauma had injury to only the rectum or to one additional organ. In contrast, all patients who had blunt rectal trauma had at least three associated injuries. In the penetrating group, 13 patients were treated by colostomy and mucus fistula; three patients with mucosal injury were managed nonoperatively. The only death occurred in a patient whose rectal injury was initially missed. Patients who had blunt rectal trauma were managed with colostomy and mucus fistula. Three patients died postoperatively, two of pelvic bleeding and one of head injury. Hemodynamic stabilization, colostomy and mucus fistula, presacral drainage, and rectal washout constitute proper treatment of patients with blunt or penetrating rectal trauma. Because of the greater number and severity of associated injuries, morbidity and mortality are higher after blunt rectal trauma.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]