Abdominal gunshot wounds—a comparative assessment of severity measures

BackgroundPenetrating abdominal trauma is a common feature of trauma treated in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The penetrating abdominal trauma index (PATI) and the injury severity score (ISS) are severity-measures most often used to gauge injury severity. It remains unclear which measure better accounts for the severity of sustained injuries. This study compares the predictive ability of both injury severity measures in patients presenting to an LMIC in South Asia.MethodsAll isolated gunshot wounds to the abdomen presenting to a university hospital between 2011 and 2012 were included. ISS and PATI were calculated for each case. Primary outcome measures included all-cause mortality and complications. Multivariable analysis adjusting for age, sex, referral status, hypotension, tachycardia, and injury severity measures was performed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve were further calculated to compare the respective abilities of ISS and PATI at predicting death and complications.ResultsA total of 70 patients were included. The average age on presentation was 34.5 y (±11.4) within a predominantly male (n = 68, 97.1%) cohort. Most gunshot wounds were intentionally inflicted (n = 67, 95.7%). The crude rates of death and complications were 34.3% and 15.7%, respectively. The median ISS was 14 (interquartile range: 11–21), and the median PATI was 16 (interquartile range: 9–26). AUROC analysis revealed that ISS was comparable with PATI at predicting mortality (AUROC [95% confidence interval]: 0.952 [0.902–1.00] versus 0.934 [0.860–1.00]) and complications (AUROC [95% confidence interval]: 0.868 [0.778–0.959] versus 0.895 [0.815–0.975]).ConclusionsThe predictive ability of ISS and PATI severity measures was found to be comparable. The results suggest that both measures can be used to risk-stratify patients with isolated abdominal gunshot wounds in an LMIC.