History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients

1902-2016

Derek J. Roberts, Chad G. Ball, David V. Feliciano, Ernest E. Moore, Rao R. Ivatury, Charles E. Lucas, Timothy Fabian, David A. Zygun, Andrew W. Kirkpatrick, Henry T. Stelfox

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To review the history of the innovation of damage control (DC) for management of trauma patients. Background: DC is an important development in trauma care that provides a valuable case study in surgical innovation. Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (1950-2015), conference abstracts (2009-2013), Web sites, textbooks, and bibliographies for articles relating to trauma DC. The innovation of DC was then classified according to the Innovation, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term study model of surgical innovation. Results: The "innovation" of DC originated from the use of therapeutic liver packing, a practice that had previously been abandoned after World War II because of adverse events. It then "developed" into abbreviated laparotomy using "rapid conservative operative techniques." Subsequent "exploration" resulted in the application of DC to increasingly complex abdominal injuries and thoracic, peripheral vascular, and orthopedic injuries. Increasing use of DC laparotomy was followed by growing reports of postinjury abdominal compartment syndrome and prophylactic use of the open abdomen to prevent intra-abdominal hypertension after DC laparotomy. By the year 2000, DC surgery had been widely adopted and was recommended for use in surgical journals, textbooks, and teaching courses ("assessment" stage of innovation). "Long-term study" of DC is raising questions about whether the procedure should be used more selectively in the context of improving resuscitation practices. Conclusions: The history of the innovation of DC illustrates how a previously abandoned surgical technique was adapted and readopted in response to an increased understanding of trauma patient physiology and changing injury patterns and trauma resuscitation practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1034-1044
Number of pages11
JournalAnnals of surgery
Volume265
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Fingerprint

Wounds and Injuries
Intra-Abdominal Hypertension
Laparotomy
Textbooks
Resuscitation
History
Bibliographic Databases
Anatomic Models
Abdominal Injuries
World War II
Vascular System Injuries
Bibliography
Therapeutic Uses
Abdomen
Orthopedics
Teaching
Thorax
Liver

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Roberts, D. J., Ball, C. G., Feliciano, D. V., Moore, E. E., Ivatury, R. R., Lucas, C. E., ... Stelfox, H. T. (2017). History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients: 1902-2016. Annals of surgery, 265(5), 1034-1044. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803

History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients : 1902-2016. / Roberts, Derek J.; Ball, Chad G.; Feliciano, David V.; Moore, Ernest E.; Ivatury, Rao R.; Lucas, Charles E.; Fabian, Timothy; Zygun, David A.; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.; Stelfox, Henry T.

In: Annals of surgery, Vol. 265, No. 5, 01.05.2017, p. 1034-1044.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Roberts, DJ, Ball, CG, Feliciano, DV, Moore, EE, Ivatury, RR, Lucas, CE, Fabian, T, Zygun, DA, Kirkpatrick, AW & Stelfox, HT 2017, 'History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients: 1902-2016', Annals of surgery, vol. 265, no. 5, pp. 1034-1044. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803
Roberts DJ, Ball CG, Feliciano DV, Moore EE, Ivatury RR, Lucas CE et al. History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients: 1902-2016. Annals of surgery. 2017 May 1;265(5):1034-1044. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803
Roberts, Derek J. ; Ball, Chad G. ; Feliciano, David V. ; Moore, Ernest E. ; Ivatury, Rao R. ; Lucas, Charles E. ; Fabian, Timothy ; Zygun, David A. ; Kirkpatrick, Andrew W. ; Stelfox, Henry T. / History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients : 1902-2016. In: Annals of surgery. 2017 ; Vol. 265, No. 5. pp. 1034-1044.
@article{244a18b4f85449018f8ec6ee94e1f714,
title = "History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients: 1902-2016",
abstract = "Objective: To review the history of the innovation of damage control (DC) for management of trauma patients. Background: DC is an important development in trauma care that provides a valuable case study in surgical innovation. Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (1950-2015), conference abstracts (2009-2013), Web sites, textbooks, and bibliographies for articles relating to trauma DC. The innovation of DC was then classified according to the Innovation, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term study model of surgical innovation. Results: The {"}innovation{"} of DC originated from the use of therapeutic liver packing, a practice that had previously been abandoned after World War II because of adverse events. It then {"}developed{"} into abbreviated laparotomy using {"}rapid conservative operative techniques.{"} Subsequent {"}exploration{"} resulted in the application of DC to increasingly complex abdominal injuries and thoracic, peripheral vascular, and orthopedic injuries. Increasing use of DC laparotomy was followed by growing reports of postinjury abdominal compartment syndrome and prophylactic use of the open abdomen to prevent intra-abdominal hypertension after DC laparotomy. By the year 2000, DC surgery had been widely adopted and was recommended for use in surgical journals, textbooks, and teaching courses ({"}assessment{"} stage of innovation). {"}Long-term study{"} of DC is raising questions about whether the procedure should be used more selectively in the context of improving resuscitation practices. Conclusions: The history of the innovation of DC illustrates how a previously abandoned surgical technique was adapted and readopted in response to an increased understanding of trauma patient physiology and changing injury patterns and trauma resuscitation practices.",
author = "Roberts, {Derek J.} and Ball, {Chad G.} and Feliciano, {David V.} and Moore, {Ernest E.} and Ivatury, {Rao R.} and Lucas, {Charles E.} and Timothy Fabian and Zygun, {David A.} and Kirkpatrick, {Andrew W.} and Stelfox, {Henry T.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "265",
pages = "1034--1044",
journal = "Annals of Surgery",
issn = "0003-4932",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - History of the Innovation of Damage Control for Management of Trauma Patients

T2 - 1902-2016

AU - Roberts, Derek J.

AU - Ball, Chad G.

AU - Feliciano, David V.

AU - Moore, Ernest E.

AU - Ivatury, Rao R.

AU - Lucas, Charles E.

AU - Fabian, Timothy

AU - Zygun, David A.

AU - Kirkpatrick, Andrew W.

AU - Stelfox, Henry T.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Objective: To review the history of the innovation of damage control (DC) for management of trauma patients. Background: DC is an important development in trauma care that provides a valuable case study in surgical innovation. Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (1950-2015), conference abstracts (2009-2013), Web sites, textbooks, and bibliographies for articles relating to trauma DC. The innovation of DC was then classified according to the Innovation, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term study model of surgical innovation. Results: The "innovation" of DC originated from the use of therapeutic liver packing, a practice that had previously been abandoned after World War II because of adverse events. It then "developed" into abbreviated laparotomy using "rapid conservative operative techniques." Subsequent "exploration" resulted in the application of DC to increasingly complex abdominal injuries and thoracic, peripheral vascular, and orthopedic injuries. Increasing use of DC laparotomy was followed by growing reports of postinjury abdominal compartment syndrome and prophylactic use of the open abdomen to prevent intra-abdominal hypertension after DC laparotomy. By the year 2000, DC surgery had been widely adopted and was recommended for use in surgical journals, textbooks, and teaching courses ("assessment" stage of innovation). "Long-term study" of DC is raising questions about whether the procedure should be used more selectively in the context of improving resuscitation practices. Conclusions: The history of the innovation of DC illustrates how a previously abandoned surgical technique was adapted and readopted in response to an increased understanding of trauma patient physiology and changing injury patterns and trauma resuscitation practices.

AB - Objective: To review the history of the innovation of damage control (DC) for management of trauma patients. Background: DC is an important development in trauma care that provides a valuable case study in surgical innovation. Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (1950-2015), conference abstracts (2009-2013), Web sites, textbooks, and bibliographies for articles relating to trauma DC. The innovation of DC was then classified according to the Innovation, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term study model of surgical innovation. Results: The "innovation" of DC originated from the use of therapeutic liver packing, a practice that had previously been abandoned after World War II because of adverse events. It then "developed" into abbreviated laparotomy using "rapid conservative operative techniques." Subsequent "exploration" resulted in the application of DC to increasingly complex abdominal injuries and thoracic, peripheral vascular, and orthopedic injuries. Increasing use of DC laparotomy was followed by growing reports of postinjury abdominal compartment syndrome and prophylactic use of the open abdomen to prevent intra-abdominal hypertension after DC laparotomy. By the year 2000, DC surgery had been widely adopted and was recommended for use in surgical journals, textbooks, and teaching courses ("assessment" stage of innovation). "Long-term study" of DC is raising questions about whether the procedure should be used more selectively in the context of improving resuscitation practices. Conclusions: The history of the innovation of DC illustrates how a previously abandoned surgical technique was adapted and readopted in response to an increased understanding of trauma patient physiology and changing injury patterns and trauma resuscitation practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84970005348&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84970005348&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803

DO - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001803

M3 - Article

VL - 265

SP - 1034

EP - 1044

JO - Annals of Surgery

JF - Annals of Surgery

SN - 0003-4932

IS - 5

ER -