The song remains the same although the instruments are changing: complications following selective non-operative management of blunt spleen trauma: a retrospective review of patients at a level I trauma centre from 1996 to 2007.

Aisling A Clancy, Corina Tiruta, Dianne Ashman, Chad G Ball, Andrew W Kirkpatrick
{"title":"The song remains the same although the instruments are changing: complications following selective non-operative management of blunt spleen trauma: a retrospective review of patients at a level I trauma centre from 1996 to 2007.","authors":"Aisling A Clancy,&nbsp;Corina Tiruta,&nbsp;Dianne Ashman,&nbsp;Chad G Ball,&nbsp;Andrew W Kirkpatrick","doi":"10.1186/1752-2897-6-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite a widespread shift to selective non-operative management (SNOM) for blunt splenic trauma, there remains uncertainty regarding the role of adjuncts such as interventional radiological techniques, the need for follow-up imaging, and the incidence of long-term complications. We evaluated the success of SNOM (including splenic artery embolization, SAE) for the management of blunt splenic injuries in severely injured patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective review (1996-2007) of the Alberta Trauma Registry and health records for blunt splenic trauma patients, aged 18 and older, with injury severity scores of 12 or greater, admitted to the Foothills Medical Centre.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 538 eligible patients, 150 (26%) underwent early operative intervention. The proportion of patients managed by SNOM rose from 50 to 78% over the study period, with an overall success rate of SNOM of 87%, while injury acuity remained unchanged over time. Among SNOM failures, 65% underwent surgery within 24 hours of admission. Splenic arterial embolization (SAE) was used in only 7% of patients managed non-operatively, although at least 21% of failed SNOM had contrast extravasation potentially amenable to SAE. Among Calgary residents undergoing SNOM, hospital readmission within six months was required in three (2%), all of whom who required emergent intervention (splenectomy 2, SAE 1) and in whom none had post-discharge follow-up imaging. Overall, the use of post-discharge follow-up CT imaging was low following SNOM (10%), and thus no CT images identified occult hemorrhage or pseudoaneurysm. We observed seven cases of delayed splenic rupture in our population which occurred from five days to two months following initial injury. Three of these occurred in the post-discharge period requiring readmission and intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SNOM was the initial treatment strategy for most patients with blunt splenic trauma with 13% requiring subsequent operative intervention intended for the spleen. Cases of delayed splenic rupture occurred up to two months following initial injury. The low use of both follow-up imaging and SAE make assessment of the utility of these adjuncts difficult and adherence to formalized protocols will be required to fully assess the benefit of multi-modality management strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":87652,"journal":{"name":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","volume":" ","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1752-2897-6-4","citationCount":"40","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-2897-6-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 40

Abstract

Background: Despite a widespread shift to selective non-operative management (SNOM) for blunt splenic trauma, there remains uncertainty regarding the role of adjuncts such as interventional radiological techniques, the need for follow-up imaging, and the incidence of long-term complications. We evaluated the success of SNOM (including splenic artery embolization, SAE) for the management of blunt splenic injuries in severely injured patients.

Methods: Retrospective review (1996-2007) of the Alberta Trauma Registry and health records for blunt splenic trauma patients, aged 18 and older, with injury severity scores of 12 or greater, admitted to the Foothills Medical Centre.

Results: Among 538 eligible patients, 150 (26%) underwent early operative intervention. The proportion of patients managed by SNOM rose from 50 to 78% over the study period, with an overall success rate of SNOM of 87%, while injury acuity remained unchanged over time. Among SNOM failures, 65% underwent surgery within 24 hours of admission. Splenic arterial embolization (SAE) was used in only 7% of patients managed non-operatively, although at least 21% of failed SNOM had contrast extravasation potentially amenable to SAE. Among Calgary residents undergoing SNOM, hospital readmission within six months was required in three (2%), all of whom who required emergent intervention (splenectomy 2, SAE 1) and in whom none had post-discharge follow-up imaging. Overall, the use of post-discharge follow-up CT imaging was low following SNOM (10%), and thus no CT images identified occult hemorrhage or pseudoaneurysm. We observed seven cases of delayed splenic rupture in our population which occurred from five days to two months following initial injury. Three of these occurred in the post-discharge period requiring readmission and intervention.

Conclusions: SNOM was the initial treatment strategy for most patients with blunt splenic trauma with 13% requiring subsequent operative intervention intended for the spleen. Cases of delayed splenic rupture occurred up to two months following initial injury. The low use of both follow-up imaging and SAE make assessment of the utility of these adjuncts difficult and adherence to formalized protocols will be required to fully assess the benefit of multi-modality management strategies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

尽管工具在改变,歌曲仍然是一样的:选择性非手术治疗钝性脾创伤后的并发症:1996年至2007年一级创伤中心患者的回顾性回顾。
背景:尽管钝性脾外伤广泛转向选择性非手术治疗(SNOM),但介入放射技术、随访影像的需要以及长期并发症的发生率等辅助手段的作用仍不确定。我们评估了SNOM(包括脾动脉栓塞,SAE)在严重损伤患者钝性脾损伤治疗中的成功。方法:回顾性回顾1996-2007年在阿尔伯塔创伤登记和健康记录的钝性脾创伤患者,年龄在18岁及以上,损伤严重程度评分为12或更高,住在Foothills医疗中心。结果:在538例符合条件的患者中,150例(26%)接受了早期手术干预。在研究期间,采用SNOM治疗的患者比例从50%上升到78%,SNOM的总体成功率为87%,而损伤敏锐度随着时间的推移保持不变。在SNOM失败患者中,65%的患者在入院24小时内接受了手术。脾动脉栓塞(SAE)仅用于7%的非手术治疗的患者,尽管至少21%的失败的SNOM有可能适用于SAE的造影剂外渗。在接受SNOM的卡尔加里居民中,有3人(2%)需要在6个月内再次入院,所有这些人都需要紧急干预(脾切除术2,SAE 1),其中没有人在出院后进行随访成像。总体而言,SNOM患者出院后随访CT成像的使用率很低(10%),因此没有CT图像发现隐匿性出血或假性动脉瘤。我们观察了7例迟发性脾破裂,发生在初次损伤后5天至2个月。其中3例发生在出院后需要再入院和干预的时期。结论:SNOM是大多数钝性脾外伤患者的初始治疗策略,13%的患者需要随后的脾脏手术干预。迟发性脾破裂的病例发生在初次损伤后2个月。随访成像和SAE的低使用率使得评估这些辅助工具的效用变得困难,需要遵守正式的协议才能充分评估多模式管理策略的益处。
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
小红书