Cargando…

Management of a gluteal region impalement injury caused by three reinforced aluminum bars: a case report

INTRODUCTION: Impalement injuries with multiple objects are rare and their management is complex. Rapid confirmation of vascular injuries requiring urgent endovascular or surgical management and accurate location of multiple objects are essential for efficient preoperative management. We report the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kanemura, Takashi, Hifumi, Toru, Okada, Ichiro, Kiriu, Nobuaki, Ogasawara, Tomoko, Hasegawa, Eiju, Kato, Hiroshi, Koido, Yuichi, Inoue, Junichi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3896853/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24380415
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-1947-7-295
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Impalement injuries with multiple objects are rare and their management is complex. Rapid confirmation of vascular injuries requiring urgent endovascular or surgical management and accurate location of multiple objects are essential for efficient preoperative management. We report the case of a patient with septic shock secondary to a perforated rectum caused by an impalement injury with three reinforced aluminum bars. CASE PRESENTATION: A 58-year-old Asian man fell from the roof of a house and received gluteal impalement injuries from three reinforced aluminum bars. A physical examination showed paralysis of his left leg and no active bleeding from the insertion sites of the impaled objects. Multidetector computed tomography angiography confirmed the location of the aluminum bars, which had spared his small bowel, ureter and major vessels. No significant extravasation was observed. Two bars were successfully removed under general anesthesia in the lithotomy position. The third bar, which pierced his rectum, passed through the left side of his vertebrae and extended up to the superior side of his left kidney, was removed following a celiotomy. After removal of this bar, bleeding from the anterior side of the sacral bone was controlled by gauze packing. After surgery, our patient was admitted to our intensive care unit under endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Dopamine therapy was initiated, followed by direct hemoperfusion with polymyxin B-immobilized fiber (PMX-DHP) for septic shock secondary to a perforated rectum. This treatment was continued for two hours, resulting in stabilization of our patient’s hemodynamic condition. Daily peritoneal lavage was performed for several days, along with a colostomy. Although there were motor and sensory disturbances below the L3 level, there were no complications. On day 191 of admission, our patient was discharged with motor and sensory disturbances below the L3 level. He now uses a wheelchair and depends on assistance from others for daily activities. CONCLUSION: Preoperative multidetector computed tomography angiography confirmed the anatomic location of the aluminum bars and the absence of extravasation; these findings aided in treatment planning. Our patient was successfully managed by colostomy and aggressive surgical and critical care including direct hemoperfusion with polymyxin B-immobilized fiber, and developed no intra-abdominal infection or meningitis.