Diagnostic Laparoscopy in Trauma Patients: Do We Need to Open and See if We Can See Without Opening?

Background: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) has been advocated to reduce the incidence of nontherapeutic laparotomies (NL) among stable trauma patients. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of hemodynamically stable trauma patients undergoing DL versus NL. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database over 4 y (2017-2020). Hemodynamically stable (systolic blood pressure >90 & heart rate < 120) adult (≥18 y) trauma patients undergoing DL or NL were included. Patients were stratified into DL and NL and substratified based on the mechanism of injury (blunt versus penetrating) and compared. Results: Over 4 y, 3801 patients were identified, of which, 997 (26.2%) underwent DL. Overall, 25.6% sustained blunt injuries. The mean (SD) age was 39 (16) and 79.5% were male. The median injury severity score and abdominal abbreviated injury scale were 4 [4-9] and 1 [1-2], with no difference among study groups (P ≥ 0.05). The overall mortality and major complication rates were 2.8% and 13.2%, respectively. After controlling for potential confounding factors, DL was independently associated with lower odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 0.10, 95% CI [0.04-0.29], P < 0.001) and major complications (adjusted odds ratio: 0.38, 95% CI [0.29-0.50], P < 0.001) and shorter hospital length of stay (β: −1.22, 95% CI [-1.78 to −0.67], P < 0.001). The trends toward improved outcomes in the DL group remained the same in the subanalysis of patients with penetrating and blunt injuries. Conclusions: With advances in minimally invasive surgery, unnecessary exploratory laparotomy can be avoided in many trauma patients. Our study shows that hemodynamically stable patients undergoing DL had superior outcomes compared to those with NL.