Is Damage Control Surgery Better than Traditional Surgery in Multiple Trauma: A Meta Analysis

Background: The concept of damage control surgery (DCS) has been proposed and used for many years. In this study, we investigated whether the DCS is more effective than traditional surgery (TS) for treating multiple traumas. Methods: After formulating the retrieval strategy, we searched 12 databases and two clinical trial centers. Data from eligible studies were included and extracted based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. To analyze the results, we used the risk ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the risk of bias in all the included studies. RevMan (version 5.3) and Stata (version 14 and 17) were used for data analysis. Results: First, the mortality rate of DCS group was reduced (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.34, P < 0.001), and the success rate of rescue was improved (RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.29 to 1.44, P < 0.001). Second, the DCS group had shorter in-hospital length of stay (WMD = −5.58, 95% CI: −6.83 to −4.32, P < 0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (WMD = −3.54, 95% CI: −4.57 to −2.51, P < 0.001), and significantly reduced the incidence of complications (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.43, P < 0.001), especially disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.36, P < 0.001), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.61, P < 0.001), and shock (RR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.56, P < 0.001). Then, the recovery time of body temperature (WMD = −7.68, 95% CI: −9.39 to −5.97, P < 0.001), clearance time of lactic acid (WMD = −17.58, 95% CI: −21.05 to −14.12, P < 0.001), the recovery time of prothrombin time (PT) (WMD = −11.79, 95% CI: −13.67 to −9.91, P < 0.001), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) (WMD = −12.69, 95% CI: −14.53 to −10.85, P < 0.001) and base excess (BE) (WMD = −16.07, 95% CI: −16.58 to −15.55, P < 0.001) of DCS group decreased. Finally, the DCS group showed reduced intraoperative blood loss (WMD = −421.53, 95% CI: −494.44 to −348.62, P < 0.001), operation time (WMD = −24.65, 95% CI: −35.50 to −13.80, P = 0.007), and red blood cell transfusion volume (WMD = −5.95, 95% CI: −7.01 to −4.89, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Our research shows that for patients who have suffered multiple trauma, DCS is more efficient than TS for patients who have experienced multiple traumas. In the future, more detailed, large-scale, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are required to verify our findings.