The advancement of seat belts have been essential to reducing morbidity and mortality related to motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). The \"seat belt sign\" (SBS) is an important physical exam finding that has guided management for decades. This study, comprising a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis, asses the current literature for the likelihood of the SBS relating to intra-abdominal injury and surgical intervention.
PubMed and Scopus databases were searched from their beginnings through August 4, 2023 for eligible studies. Outcomes included the prevalence of intra-abdominal injury and need for surgical intervention. Cochrane\'s Risk of Bias (RoB) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were applied to assess risk of bias and study quality; Q-statistics and I2 values were used to assess for heterogeneity.
The search yielded nine observational studies involving 3050 patients, 1937 (63.5%) of which had a positive SBS. The pooled prevalence of any intra-abdominal injury was 0.42, (95% CI 0.28-0.58, I2 = 96%) The presence of a SBS was significantly associated with increased odds of intra-abdominal injury (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.12-11.6, P = 0.03; I2 = 89%), and an increased likelihood of surgical intervention (OR 7.34, 95% CI 2.03-26.54, P < 0.001; I2 = 29%). The measurement for any intra-abdominal injury was associated with high heterogeneity, I2 = 89%.
This meta-analysis suggests that the presence of a SBS was associated with a statistically significant higher likelihood of intra-abdominal injury and need for surgical intervention. The study had high heterogeneity, likely due to the technological advancements over the course of this study, including seat belt design and diagnostic imaging sensitivity. Further studies with more recent data are needed to confirm these results.

Seat belt syndrome (SBS) represents all injury profiles associated with seat belt injuries and motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). Seat belt syndrome classically presents with a superficial seat belt sign that may signify deeper intra-abdominal and/or spinal involvement. The amount of force transmitted from the restraint to the passenger ultimately dictates the amount and severity of the injury. We present a unique case of a 59-year-old female involved in a motor vehicle crash with multiple traumatic injuries, including seat belt syndrome, abdominal wall transection, and bowel injuries. She later had reconstruction of her traumatic abdominal wall hernias (TAWHs). Three unique approaches were used in the management of her traumatic abdominal wall hernias: (1) preoperative Botulinum toxin (Botox) injections, (2) operative use of biologic and bioabsorbable meshes in contaminated fields, and (3) postoperative physical therapy and body positioning. The patient did not experience any recurrence of these hernias after her abdominal wall reconstruction and remains alive at the time this case was written. The diagnostic criteria and surgical management of traumatic abdominal wall hernias have yet to be established, and the case presented here provides approaches that should serve as future areas for study.

BACKGROUND: Trauma providers seek to accurately assess the risk of patients with abdominal seat belt sign (ASBS). As hospital costs continue to rise, identification of strategies to safely discharge emergency department (ED) patients has become crucial.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to 1) describe a large cohort of patients by type of ASBS and 2) determine the value of computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen and pelvis as a screening tool to rule out intra-abdominal injury (IAI) and support discharge of stable patients.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case series of all patients presenting to our urban, Level I trauma center from 2013-2015. We studied motor vehicle collision patients who presented with ASBS. We further classified individuals into ASBS groups: Abrasion, Ecchymosis, Abrasion + Ecchymosis, or Unknown ASBS to examine differences between groups.
RESULTS: In one of the largest described cohorts, the ASBS remained associated with IAI, most commonly, solid organ injury. Of 425 patients, 36.1% had some IAI on CT, but only 13.6% required laparotomy. Categorizing the type of skin injury in ASBS, we found that both abrasion and ecchymosis were associated with IAI. Initial CT performed with 100% sensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that ED trauma patients with significant seat belt abrasion or contusion can have IAI. With the very high sensitivity of modern abdominal CT scanners, clinicians could consider safe ED discharge of stable ASBS patients while providing strong return precautions. Our large cohort strengthens the evidence on decision-making in ASBS patients to ensure outcomes and use of health care resources.

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.

Exploratory laparotomy in children after motor vehicle collision (MVC) is rare. In the absence of definitive hemorrhage or free abdominal air on radiographic imaging, predictors for operative exploration are conflicting.
The purpose of this study was to explore objective findings that may aid in determining which children require operative abdominal exploration after MVC.
Data from 2010-2014 at an American College of Surgeons-certified level 1 pediatric trauma center were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, vital signs, laboratory data, radiologic studies, operative records, associated injuries, and outcomes were analyzed and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Eight hundred sixty-two patients 0-18 years of age presented to the hospital after an MVC during the study period. Seventeen patients (2.0%) required abdominal exploration and all were found to have intraabdominal injuries. Respiratory rate was the only vital sign that was significantly altered (p = 0.04) in those who required abdominal surgery compared with those who did not. Physical examination findings, such as the seat belt sign, abdominal bruising, abdominal wound, and abdominal tenderness, were present significantly more frequently in those requiring abdominal surgery (p < 0.0001). Each finding had a negative predictive value for the need for operative exploration of at least 0.98. There were no significant differences in trauma laboratory values or radiographic findings between the 2 groups.
Data from this study solidify the relationship between specific physical examination findings and the need for abdominal exploration after MVC in children. In addition, these data suggest that a lack of the seat belt sign, abdominal bruising, abdominal wounds, or abdominal tenderness are individually predictive of patients who will not require surgical intervention.

OBJECTIVE: We analyzed our series of patients with seatbelt signs (bruising) that underwent laparotomy in order to correlate injury pattern with clinical course and outcome.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with seatbelt signs presenting to the level 1 Trauma Unit between 2005 and 2010 was performed. We evaluated the nature of injuries during laparotomy associated with seatbelt signs and their treatment and complications.
RESULTS: There were 41 patients, 25 (61%) male, with a median age of 26 years. Median injury severity score (ISS) was 25 (range 6-66) and overall mortality was 10% (four patients). Patients were classified into three groups according to time from injury to surgery. Median time to surgery for the immediate group (n = 12) was 1.05 h, early group (n = 22) was 2.7 h, and delayed group (n = 7) was 19.5 h. Patients in the immediate group tended to have solid organ injuries; whereas, patients in the delayed group had bowel injury. Patients with solid organ injuries were found to be more seriously injured and had higher mortality (P < 0.01) and morbidity compared with patients with the \"classic\" bowel injury pattern associated with a typical seatbelt sign.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that there is a cohort of patients with seatbelt injury who have solid organ injury requiring urgent intervention. Solid organ injuries associated with malpositioned seatbelts lying higher on the abdomen tend to result in hemodynamic instability necessitating immediate surgery. They have more postoperative complications and a greater mortality. Seatbelt signs should be accurately documented after any car crash.

Safety belts are the most important safety system in motor vehicles and when worn intend to prevent serious injuries. However, in unusual circumstances (high velocity motor vehicle collisions) these safety measures (seat belts) can be the source and cause of serious injuries. The seat belt syndrome was first described as early by Garrett and Braunste in but the term \"seat belt sign\" was discussed by Doersch and Dozier. Medical personnel\'s involved in emergency care of trauma patients should be aware of seat belt sign and there should a higher index of suspicion to rule out underlying organ injuries.