A nationwide Australian cross-sectional study assessing current management and infection prevention practices after Splenic Artery Embolisation (SAE) following trauma.

Warren Clements, Ian Woolley, Adil Zia, Helen Kavnoudias, Dieter G Weber, Denis W Spelman, Joseph Mathew
{"title":"A nationwide Australian cross-sectional study assessing current management and infection prevention practices after Splenic Artery Embolisation (SAE) following trauma.","authors":"Warren Clements, Ian Woolley, Adil Zia, Helen Kavnoudias, Dieter G Weber, Denis W Spelman, Joseph Mathew","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Management of patients after blunt splenic injury treated with Splenic Artery Embolisation (SAE) varies. This includes vaccination, post-procedure antibiotic use, and follow-up. This study aimed to assess current practice of management and infection prevention across Australia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 29-question survey was sent via the Australian and New Zealand Trauma Registry to all 28 contributing trauma hospitals in Australia. Questions were based on data from the 2022 calendar year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses were received from 12 sites (43 %) including 6 of 8 Australian regions (75 %). Of responding sites, 10 (83 %) offer SAE via a 24-hour 7-day rostered service. Of a total 568 splenic injuries, there were 177 SAE treatments with a median of 8 per site (range 0-65). SAE constituted 31 % of all splenic management, conservative management in 65 %, and splenectomy in 4 %. 8 sites (67 %) had a protocol for splenic trauma. Prophylactic SAE was performed for AAST IV-V injuries at 8 sites (67 %), which included 80 % of adult hospitals. Distal SAE was the predominant treatment type (70 %). Patients were routinely admitted for median 4 days after SAE (range 2-5). Routine inpatient antibiotics were administered to SAE patients at 2 sites (17 %) while 1 site (8 %) routinely recommended lifelong antibiotics after SAE. Routine inpatient vaccinations were used by 4 of 11 sites (36 %), while 3 sites (25 %) recommend vaccinations in the future. 11 sites (92 %) follow-up patients post-discharge. Written information on SAE was given to patients at 9 hospitals (75 %) while splenic function testing was performed at 5 sites (42 %), mostly assessment for Howell-Jolly Bodies (80 %). 11 sites (92 %) would change clinical practice in the future if evidence on splenic immune function evolved.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Across responding Australian hospitals, the use of vaccinations, antibiotics, and splenic function testing after SAE was low, which reflects existing evidence for preserved splenic function after SAE, plus unpublished experience of key stakeholders. Key societies should consider clinical practice guidelines that merge existing evidence with modern practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":94042,"journal":{"name":"Injury","volume":" ","pages":"112593"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2025.112593","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Management of patients after blunt splenic injury treated with Splenic Artery Embolisation (SAE) varies. This includes vaccination, post-procedure antibiotic use, and follow-up. This study aimed to assess current practice of management and infection prevention across Australia.

Methods: A 29-question survey was sent via the Australian and New Zealand Trauma Registry to all 28 contributing trauma hospitals in Australia. Questions were based on data from the 2022 calendar year.

Results: Responses were received from 12 sites (43 %) including 6 of 8 Australian regions (75 %). Of responding sites, 10 (83 %) offer SAE via a 24-hour 7-day rostered service. Of a total 568 splenic injuries, there were 177 SAE treatments with a median of 8 per site (range 0-65). SAE constituted 31 % of all splenic management, conservative management in 65 %, and splenectomy in 4 %. 8 sites (67 %) had a protocol for splenic trauma. Prophylactic SAE was performed for AAST IV-V injuries at 8 sites (67 %), which included 80 % of adult hospitals. Distal SAE was the predominant treatment type (70 %). Patients were routinely admitted for median 4 days after SAE (range 2-5). Routine inpatient antibiotics were administered to SAE patients at 2 sites (17 %) while 1 site (8 %) routinely recommended lifelong antibiotics after SAE. Routine inpatient vaccinations were used by 4 of 11 sites (36 %), while 3 sites (25 %) recommend vaccinations in the future. 11 sites (92 %) follow-up patients post-discharge. Written information on SAE was given to patients at 9 hospitals (75 %) while splenic function testing was performed at 5 sites (42 %), mostly assessment for Howell-Jolly Bodies (80 %). 11 sites (92 %) would change clinical practice in the future if evidence on splenic immune function evolved.

Conclusion: Across responding Australian hospitals, the use of vaccinations, antibiotics, and splenic function testing after SAE was low, which reflects existing evidence for preserved splenic function after SAE, plus unpublished experience of key stakeholders. Key societies should consider clinical practice guidelines that merge existing evidence with modern practice.

一项澳大利亚全国范围的横断面研究评估了创伤后脾动脉栓塞(SAE)的当前管理和感染预防措施。
简介:钝性脾损伤后采用脾动脉栓塞治疗(SAE)的治疗方法各不相同。这包括疫苗接种、术后抗生素使用和随访。本研究旨在评估澳大利亚目前的管理和感染预防实践。方法:通过澳大利亚和新西兰创伤登记处向澳大利亚所有28家创伤医院发送了一份包含29个问题的调查。问题基于2022日历年的数据。结果:收到了来自12个站点(43%)的回复,其中包括澳大利亚8个地区中的6个(75%)。在回应的网站中,10家(83%)通过7天24小时的名册服务提供SAE服务。在568例脾损伤中,有177例SAE治疗,平均每个部位8例(范围0-65)。脾切除术占31%,保守治疗占65%,脾切除术占4%。8个部位(67%)有脾脏损伤的治疗方案。在8个部位(67%)对AAST IV-V损伤进行了预防性SAE,其中包括80%的成人医院。远端SAE是主要的治疗类型(70%)。患者在SAE后常规住院4天(范围2-5天)。2处(17%)SAE患者接受常规住院抗生素治疗,1处(8%)SAE患者接受常规终身抗生素治疗。11个站点中有4个(36%)使用了常规住院疫苗接种,而3个站点(25%)建议将来接种疫苗。11个站点(92%)患者出院后随访。9家医院(75%)向患者提供了SAE的书面信息,同时在5个部位(42%)进行了脾功能检查,主要是对Howell-Jolly体进行评估(80%)。如果脾脏免疫功能的证据不断发展,11个地点(92%)将在未来改变临床实践。结论:在回应的澳大利亚医院中,SAE后疫苗接种、抗生素和脾功能检测的使用率很低,这反映了SAE后脾功能保存的现有证据,以及关键利益相关者未发表的经验。关键学会应考虑将现有证据与现代实践相结合的临床实践指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信