Penetrating Neck Injury: Mandatory exploration versus conservative approach

  • Muhammad Hamid Majid
  • Mahmood Ayyaz
  • Faraz Fahim
Keywords: Neck Injury. Wounds, Penetrating. Neck. Physical Examination. Thoracic Injuries. Wounds, Nonpenetrating. Wounds, Stab. Morbidity. Angiography.

Abstract

This study is designed to investigate the outcome of patients managed on both conservative as well as operative protocols and then compare the two groups for morbidity and mortality. It is a comparative study comparing the groups of patients with operative and non operative intervention done for penetrating neck trauma at Mayo Hospital Lahore for a period of six years from September 1995 to August 2001. All patients of age more than 12 years of age presenting with penetrating cervical trauma in our emergency were included in study. In patients with multiple injuries mortality and morbidity of only cervical trauma was compared. Neck was divided in to three zones according to recognized anatomical landmarks. In conservative group 38.9% developed complications where as in other group 46.4%, developed complications This difference was not significant (p=0.05) Mean hospital stay was 10 days in the conservative group where as 4 days in other group which was statistically significant. Hence we conclude that patients with penetrating neck injuries who are clinically stable can be managed conservatively after appropriate investigations.

Published
2016-07-15
How to Cite
Majid, M. H., Ayyaz, M., & Fahim, F. (2016). Penetrating Neck Injury: Mandatory exploration versus conservative approach. Annals of King Edward Medical University, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.21649/akemu.v9i4.1372
Section
Articles