Damage control surgery (DCS) in Australia has evolved significantly. This review analyses the evolution of DCS, highlighting recent changes in surgical practices. A literature review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Search terms included ‘damage control surgery,’ ‘trauma surgery,’ and ‘Australian trauma care’. Current literature emphasizes careful patient selection for DCS, guided by strict physiological and clinical parameters (2), as inappropriate DCS can lead to increased morbidity (3, 4). The expansion of endovascular technology, including arterial embolization and balloon occlusion has expedited haemorrhagic control (5). There is no universally accepted method for temporary abdominal closure, though VAC-based systems are increasingly preferred over graft material or sterilised bags (6). Guidelines advocate for earlier fascial closure after definitive surgery, as it correlates with improved outcomes in intensive care (4). Damage control surgery in Australia has advanced significantly over the years. Ongoing research of these strategies will be crucial in optimizing DCS protocols for critically injured patients. 1.Germanos S et al. Damage control surgery in the abdomen: managing severe injuries. Int J Surg. 2008 2.Jaunoo SS, Harji DP. Damage control surgery. Int J Surg. 2009 3.Lamb CM et al. Damage control surgery in the era of resuscitation. Br J Anaesth. 2014 4.Beldowicz BC. Evolution of damage control: concept and practice. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2018 5.Ascenti V et al. Damage Control Interventional Radiology: bridging non-operative management and surgery. CVIR Endovascular. 2024 6.Godat L et al. Abdominal damage control surgery: WSES position paper. World J Emerg Surg. 2013