RESULTS OF CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT OF GRADE III, IV PANCREATIC INJURY IN CHILDREN AT VIETDUC UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: Describe the clinical and paraclinical characteristics of patients with grade III and IV pancreatic trauma according to AAST classification and evaluate the results of conservative treatment pancreatic trauma in children at VietDuc University Hospital in the period 2018-2022. Material and method: Retrospective case series of 24 patients with grade III and IV pancreatic trauma on computed tomography (CT) and treated conservatively at the Department of Pediatric and Neonatal Surgery - Viet Duc university Hospital from January 2018 to December 2022. Results: The average age was 10,4 years old, the main cause: traffic accident (95,9%), clinical symptoms: abdominal pain (100%) and abdominal wall abrasions (95,8%). Pancreatic injuries on CT: pancreatic isthmus accounted for 41,7%, body and tail of pancreas 48,3%, AAST classification: 58,3% grade III, 41,7% grade IV. Conservative treatment results: 2 patients required surgery, no patient died. The successful treatment rate was 91,7%, of which 16 patients (66,7%) developed pancreatic pseudocysts and had cyst-gastric drainage via endoscopy. Long-term follow-up from 13 months to 5 years. All patients were stable, and all tests were normal. Conclusion: Conservative treatment of grade III and IV pancreatic injuries in children is feasible and has a high success rate, but treatment should be performed in places with surgical conditions as well as endoscopic intervention and radiological therapy.
Article Details
Keywords
Pancreatic trauma, pancreatic pseudocyst, conservative treatment, ultrasound-guided drainage.
References
2. Cigdem MK, Senturk S, Onen A, Siga M, Akay H, Otcu S. Nonoperative management of pancreatic injuries in pediatric patients. Surg Today. 2011; 41(5):655-659. doi:10.1007/s00595-010-4339-4
3. Trịnh Văn Tuấn, Trần Bình Giang. Điều trị chấn thương tụy tại bệnh viện Việt Đức. Tạp chí nghiên cứu Y học. 2013;tập 83(số 3):108-115.
4. Trịnh Hồng Sơn, Trần Công Hoan, Bùi Văn Lệnh. Chụp cắt lớp vi tính trong chẩn đoán chấn thương tụy (nhân hai trường hợp). Y học thực hành. 2002;6(424):61-63.
5. de Blaauw I, Winkelhorst JT, Rieu PN, et al. Pancreatic injury in children: good outcome of nonoperative treatment. J Pediatr Surg. 2008; 43(9): 1640-1643. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg. 2008. 03.061
6. Krige JEJ, Kotze UK, Setshedi M, Nicol AJ, Navsaria PH. Prognostic factors, morbidity and mortality in pancreatic trauma: a critical appraisal of 432 consecutive patients treated at a Level 1 Trauma Centre. Injury. 2015;46(5):830-836. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2015.01.032
7. Beres AL, Wales PW, Christison-Lagay ER, McClure ME, Fallat ME, Brindle ME. Non-operative management of high-grade pancreatic trauma: is it worth the wait? J Pediatr Surg. 2013; 48(5): 1060-1064. doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg. 2013.02.027
8. Garg RK, Mahajan JK. Blunt Trauma Pancreas in Children: Is Non-Operative Management Appropriate for All Grades? Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr. 2017;20(4):252-258. doi:10.5223/ pghn.2017.20.4.252
9. Thái Nguyên Hưng. Đánh giá kết quả điều trị nội khoa chấn thương thân đuôi tụy. Tạp chí y học Việt Nam. 2022;521(2). doi:10.51298/ vmj.v521i2.4033