UNASSIGNED: Seat belt syndrome (SBS) is a rare condition described as injuries sustained due to thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic compression in the context of traffic accidents. These injuries can range from minor skin abrasions to large lesions of internal organs and spinal cord involvement. Traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWH) are one of the injuries that can be associated.
METHODS: A 21-year-old male suffered a severe injury, resulting in complete transection of all abdominal wall musculature due to SBS, with associated visceral injury. Emergency surgery included intestinal and sigmoid colon resection, along with cava vein repair. After a prolonged recovery, a second-stage surgery for abdominal wall reconstruction was planned. Prehabilitation involved botulinum toxin and pneumoperitoneum, with surgical planning utilizing CT scan and 3D reconstruction. The second-stage surgery included transversus abdominis release and placement of double mesh.
UNASSIGNED: Managing traumatic abdominal wall hernias in polytrauma patients necessitates emergent surgery for vital injuries, while reconstructive surgery timing is crucial, with patient preparation being essential. Surgical planning, including 3D reconstructions, enhances accuracy, and safety, with repair technique selection depending on anatomical features. Given our patient\'s athletic background and preoperative vascular CT findings, flapless reconstructive surgery was chosen to mitigate vascular risks.
CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutic approach to traumatic abdominal wall injuries should be individualized to each patient, with a focus on addressing vital injuries first and considering abdominal wall reconstruction surgery at a subsequent stage. Utilizing CT scan with 3D reconstruction can be a valuable tool for preoperative planning in cases involving significant abdominal wall defects.

BACKGROUND: Protective devices such as seat belts and airbags have improved the safety of motor vehicle occupants, but limited data suggest they may be associated with increased blunt bowel (small bowel or colon) injuries (BI). Unfortunately, this risk is unquantified.
METHODS: We analyzed the National Trauma Data Bank (2017-2019) using ICD-10 codes to identify adult motor vehicle occupants with BI who underwent surgical repair. We used logistic regression modeling to compare the risk of undergoing surgical repair for BI after using a protective device.
RESULTS: Of 2,848,592 injured patients, 475,546 (16.7%) were motor vehicle occupants. Only 1.2% (n = 5627/475,546) of patients underwent a bowel repair or resection. Using a seat belt only was associated with an adjusted OR of 2.09 (95% CI 1.91, 2.28) for undergoing a bowel repair/resection when adjusting for Injury Severity Score (ISS) and age. Airbag deployment without a seat belt had an adjusted OR of 1.46 (95% CI 1.31, 1.62), while both devices combined conferred an OR of 3.27 (95% CI 3.02, 3.54). However, using a seat belt was protective against death with an OR of 0.50 (95% CI 0.48, 0.53), adjusted for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Score, and ISS.
CONCLUSIONS: Seat belts and airbags are essential public health safety interventions and protect against death in motor vehicle-associated injuries. However, patients involved in MVCs with airbag deployment or while wearing a seat belt are at an increased risk of bowel injury requiring surgery compared to unrestrained patients, despite these events being relatively uncommon.

Intestinal injuries in seat belt syndrome are relatively uncommon but can be potentially lethal due to accompanying peritonitis and hemorrhaging. It can be difficult to identify the exact injury sites of the intestine as multiple areas are often damaged and massive intraperitoneal hemorrhaging may make it challenging to determine causal bleeding points of mesenteric injuries. This study aimed to clarify the incidence and distribution of intestinal injuries in seat belt syndrome.
We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 25 patients who underwent laparotomy for suspected intestinal injuries due to seat belt syndrome during a frontal impact. The incidence and distribution of the sites of intestinal injuries, as well as associated injuries, were investigated. Intestinal injuries were divided into bowel and mesenteric injuries. Additionally, bowel injuries were classified into two types: perforation and non-perforation (seromuscular tears/intramural hematomas). Regarding the injured sites, the small intestine was divided into the following three parts: (1) the ligament of Treitz (100-cm distal from the ligament [proximal jejunum]), (2) the ileocecal valve (100-cm proximal from the valve [distal ileum]), and (3) the intermediate area between those two regions (jejunoileal junction).
In total, there were 64 major injuries among 25 patients requiring surgical intervention: 34 bowel injuries (20 perforations and 14 non-perforations) and 30 mesenteric injuries. Significantly more bowel perforations occurred in the small intestine (1 [interquartile range (IQR), 0-1]) than in the large intestine (0 [IQR, 0-0]) (p = 0.003). Similarly, significantly more mesenteric injuries occurred in the small intestine (1 [IQR, 0-1.25]) than in the large intestine (0 [IQR, 0-0]) (p < 0.001). Specific sites of the mesenteric injuries in the small intestine included the jejunoileal junction (0 [IQR, 0-1]) and distal ileum (0 [IQR, 0-1]); the jejunoileal junction was significantly more vulnerable than the proximal jejunum (0 [IQR, 0-0]) (p = 0.015).
In patients with seat belt syndrome, the small intestine was more vulnerable to perforation and mesenteric injury than the large intestine. Additionally, for mesenteric injuries, the jejunoileal junction was more likely to be damaged than the proximal jejunum.

Seat belt aorta is rare and difficult to manage. The lack of data and follow-up increases the complexity of treating such patients. We aimed to create a decision algorithm by reviewing our current experience and analyzing the presentation and management of our patients.
We performed a descriptive case series based on retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients admitted with the diagnosis of seat belt aorta from 2008 to 2018. Seat belt aorta was defined as any blunt abdominal aortic lesion resulting from a seat belt compression mechanism after a car accident.
Nine consecutive patients were admitted with the diagnosis of seat belt aorta, all of whom developed lesions in the infrarenal aorta. Eight patients were assessed in the acute phase and one patient presented with late-onset symptoms. Associated injuries were present in all acute patients, and seat belt sign and small bowel injury were present in 88%. One patient presented with a small intimal tear and was treated conservatively. All other patients diagnosed with large intimal flaps (seven patients) and pseudoaneurysm (one patient) underwent open repair in five cases and endovascular repair in three cases. In-hospital mortality for the acute cases was 38%, with no mortality seen during follow-up. Two patients submitted to endovascular repair required reinterventions.
Seat belt aorta is a deadly condition, frequently associated with blunt thoracoabdominal trauma with concomitant injuries; the presence of a seat belt sign or lower limb ischemia must lead to a high diagnostic suspicion. Management must take into account the other concomitant injuries. Follow-up is crucial as most patients are young; they may develop complications and subsequently require further intervention.

BACKGROUND: Seat belt marks are seen frequently on occupants after motor vehicle accidents. Over the years, the clinical significance of these marks has changed as restraint systems have evolved. With modern restraint systems, signs of a compromised occupant-restraint relationship are an important and easily identified bedside finding.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to learn to recognize seat belt marks that demonstrate an abnormal occupant-restraint system relationship and to cultivate an understanding of significant soft tissue biomechanical loading associated with marks caused by a compromised occupant-restraint relationship.
CONCLUSIONS: A review of case studies from the literature combined with forensic work demonstrate a strong correlation between significant injury and improper seatbelt use. When evidence of a compromised occupant-restraint relationship exists, incorporating computed tomography angiography and observation may be clinically indicated.
CONCLUSIONS: The recognition of seat belt marks made by a compromised occupant-restraint relationship is an important finding that allows risk stratification of the patient at the bedside. Further investigation with a prospective trial at a trauma center is warranted.

Road traffic accidents are still a major cause of morbidity and mortality. With well-established whole-body CT protocols in trauma, radiologists are an integral part of trauma diagnosis and management teams. Five well-recognized traumatic syndromes (seat belt syndrome, handlebar syndrome, scapulothoracic dissociation, dashboard syndrome, and brake pedal injury) with their frequent associated complications should be diagnosed precociously according to the accident mechanism to avoid diagnostic delays and poor prognosis even if the circumstances seem minor.

BACKGROUND: Legislation making seatbelt use mandatory is considered to have reduced fatal and serious injuries by 25%, with UK government estimates predicting more than 50,000 lives saved since its introduction. However, whilst the widespread use of seatbelts has reduced the incidence of major traumatic injury and death from road-traffic collisions (RTCs), their use has also heralded a range of different injuries. The first ever seatbelt related injury was described in 1956, and since then clear patterns of seatbelt-related injuries have been recognised.
RESULTS: This review of the published literature demonstrates that the combination of airbags and three-point seatbelts renders no part of the body free from injury. Serious injuries can, and do, occur even when passengers are properly restrained and attending clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for overt or covert intra-abdominal injuries when patients involved in RTCs attend the Emergency Department. Bruising to the trunk and abdomen in a seatbelt distribution is an obvious sign that suggests an increased risk of abdominal and thoracic injury, but bruising may not be apparent and its absence should not be falsely reassuring. A high index of suspicion should be retained for other subtler signs of injury. Children and pregnant women represent high-risk groups who are particularly vulnerable to injuries.
CONCLUSIONS: In this review we highlight the common patterns of seatbelt-related injuries. A greater awareness of the type of injuries caused by seatbelt use will help clinicians to identify and treat overt and covert injuries earlier, and help reduce the rates of morbidity and mortality following RTCs.

BACKGROUND: Seat belt injuries are not uncommon. The use of seat belts is associated with a unique injury profile collectively termed \"the seat belt syndrome\". The aim is to aid in the early diagnosis of seat belt injuries.
METHODS: Two different patients presented to the emergency after sustaining a motor vehicle accident. Both were the drivers, restrained and had a frontal impact. On presentation they were hemodynamically stable with mild tenderness on the abdomen and the abdominal computed tomography (CT) did not show any signs of bowel or mesenteric injuries. The signs of peritonitis became obvious after 24h in one case and after 3 days in the other.
CONCLUSIONS: Early diagnosis provides better outcomes for patients with seat belt injuries, but this remains a challenge to trauma surgeons. The typical findings of peritonitis might not be present initially. The presence of abdominal wall ecchymosis (seat belt sign) increases the chance of intraabdominal injuries by eight folds.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical signs of intestinal injuries might not be obvious on presentation. In the presence of seat belt sign the possibility of bowl injury must be suspected. Admit the patient for observation even if no clinical or radiological findings are present at presentation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to establish the biomechanics, presentation and diagnosis of mesenteric avulsions following blunt abdominal trauma and reach a consensus on their overall management.
METHODS: A systematic review of literature in MedLine, Embase, Scopus and CINHAL in English language from 1951 to November 2014 was performed. A total of 20 reported cases were identified. Variables including patient\'s demographics, signs and symptoms, mechanism of injury, investigative modality, management, length of stay, follow-up and outcomes were reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 28.5 years (range 10-58 years), with a male-to-female ratio of 3:1. The commonest mechanism of injury was road traffic accident due to seat belt restraint (n = 12, 60 %). The commonest presentation was diffuse abdominal tenderness (n = 10, 45 %) followed by ecchymosis/bruising (n = 9, 40 %). Computed tomography (CT) remained the investigative modality of choice (n = 9, 45 %). All cases had an emergency exploratory laparotomy (n = 18, 90 %) within the initial 24 h and the median length of stay was 19 days (range 4-90 days). The overall mortality was 15 % (n = 3).
CONCLUSIONS: Mesenteric avulsion is rare and has a complex and vague presentation. Due to its potential mortality and morbidity, emergency physicians should keep a high index of suspicion in individuals with blunt abdominal trauma from any mechanism of injury.