Introduction: Laparoscopy has been shown to offer a safe alternative to laparotomy in hemodynamically stable pediatric trauma patients. Our purpose was to identify factors predictive of this approach and examine surgical outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using the ACS Pediatric Trauma Quality Improvement Program to examine pediatric patients who underwent exploration for blunt or penetrating abdominal trauma in 2014 and 2015. Patients with contraindications to laparoscopy were excluded. Multivariable modeling identified predictors of a laparoscopic approach. Secondary analysis assessed differences in outcomes and resource utilization between laparoscopy and laparotomy groups. Results: A total of 160 patients met inclusion criteria. Patients undergoing surgery in the northeastern (odds ratio [OR]: 2.25, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26-4.03, P = .006) and western (OR: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.06-3.88, P = .032) U.S. regions had over two times greater odds of undergoing laparoscopy as those treated in the south. Patients injured by a firearm were significantly less likely to undergo laparoscopy than those suffering blunt injury (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.55, P < .001). After adjustment, patients explored laparoscopically in comparison with those through laparotomy had decreased average length of stay (LOS) (mean difference [MD]: 2.55 days, 95% CI: 1.19-3.90, P < .001) and number of intensive care unit (ICU) days (MD: 1.13 days, 95% CI: 0.28-1.98, P = .01). Conclusion: Trauma laparoscopy may decrease LOS and ICU days in select pediatric patients requiring abdominal exploration; however, laparoscopy is not uniformly practiced in the United States. Targeted education and protocols for initial use of laparoscopy should be incorporated into hospitals treating this group to minimize morbidity and resource utilization.
Keywords: minimally invasive trauma surgery; pediatric trauma; trauma laparoscopy.