Background: The difference in speed, efficiency, and safety between diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL) and abdominal computerized tomography in the evaluation of adult blunt trauma patients with multiple injuries was investigated.
Methods: A prospective protocol was analyzed. Adult blunt trauma patients admitted to a Level I trauma center in 1994 were examined. Registry and chart data were used. Patients admitted before the institution of the protocol (January 1-June 30, 1994) were compared with those admitted afterward (July 1-December 31, 1994). Time spent in the emergency department before definitive placement or surgical intervention was studied.
Results: Patients in the second period, when DPL was used more frequently, spent significantly less time in the emergency department and radiology. No missed injuries were identified in either group. The percentages of nontherapeutic laparotomies were similar between the two groups. Cost was significantly lower in the group that underwent DPL.
Conclusion: Patients with severe head injury, open fractures, or any evidence of hemodynamic instability are better served by DPL as the primary diagnostic modality. Its sensitivity and specificity are equivalent to those of computerized tomography; this facilitates evaluation and allows for simultaneous procedures and quicker initiation of definitive treatment.