Amanda Olsen, Emma Possfelt-Møller, Lasse Rehné Jensen, Mikkel Taudorf, Søren Steemann Rudolph, Louise Preisler, Luit Penninga
{"title":"外伤性脾损伤非手术治疗后的随访策略:系统综述。","authors":"Amanda Olsen, Emma Possfelt-Møller, Lasse Rehné Jensen, Mikkel Taudorf, Søren Steemann Rudolph, Louise Preisler, Luit Penninga","doi":"10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Blunt trauma often results in splenic injuries, with non-operative management (NOM) being the preferred approach for stable patients. Following NOM, splenic vascular injuries, such as pseudoaneurysms, may arise, prompting radiological follow-up. However, a consensus on optimal radiological follow-up strategies is lacking. This systematic review evaluates existing evidence on radiological follow-up post-NOM for traumatic splenic injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conducting a systematic review following updated PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and trial registries from January 2010 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria covered studies on radiological follow-up for blunt splenic injuries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 5794 studies, 17 were included involving 3392 patients. Various radiological modalities were used, with computed tomography (CT) being the most common. Vascular injuries occurred in 4.5% of patients, with most pseudoaneurysms diagnosed on day 2-6 post-trauma, and leading to intervention in 60% of these cases. Thirteen studies recommended routine follow-up, with six favouring CT, and seven supporting radiation-free modalities. Four studies proposed follow-up based on clinical indications, initial findings, or symptoms. Recommendations for specific timing of radiological follow-up ranged from 48 h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Limited high-quality evidence exists on radiological follow-up in isolated blunt splenic injuries, causing uncertainty in clinical practice. However, our review suggests a reasonable need for follow-up, with contrast-enhanced ultrasound emerging as a promising alternative to CT. Specific timing and criteria for follow-up remain unresolved, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies to address these knowledge gaps.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Follow-up strategies after non-operative treatment of traumatic splenic injuries: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Amanda Olsen, Emma Possfelt-Møller, Lasse Rehné Jensen, Mikkel Taudorf, Søren Steemann Rudolph, Louise Preisler, Luit Penninga\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Blunt trauma often results in splenic injuries, with non-operative management (NOM) being the preferred approach for stable patients. Following NOM, splenic vascular injuries, such as pseudoaneurysms, may arise, prompting radiological follow-up. However, a consensus on optimal radiological follow-up strategies is lacking. This systematic review evaluates existing evidence on radiological follow-up post-NOM for traumatic splenic injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conducting a systematic review following updated PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and trial registries from January 2010 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria covered studies on radiological follow-up for blunt splenic injuries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 5794 studies, 17 were included involving 3392 patients. Various radiological modalities were used, with computed tomography (CT) being the most common. Vascular injuries occurred in 4.5% of patients, with most pseudoaneurysms diagnosed on day 2-6 post-trauma, and leading to intervention in 60% of these cases. Thirteen studies recommended routine follow-up, with six favouring CT, and seven supporting radiation-free modalities. Four studies proposed follow-up based on clinical indications, initial findings, or symptoms. Recommendations for specific timing of radiological follow-up ranged from 48 h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Limited high-quality evidence exists on radiological follow-up in isolated blunt splenic injuries, causing uncertainty in clinical practice. However, our review suggests a reasonable need for follow-up, with contrast-enhanced ultrasound emerging as a promising alternative to CT. Specific timing and criteria for follow-up remain unresolved, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies to address these knowledge gaps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Follow-up strategies after non-operative treatment of traumatic splenic injuries: a systematic review.
Purpose: Blunt trauma often results in splenic injuries, with non-operative management (NOM) being the preferred approach for stable patients. Following NOM, splenic vascular injuries, such as pseudoaneurysms, may arise, prompting radiological follow-up. However, a consensus on optimal radiological follow-up strategies is lacking. This systematic review evaluates existing evidence on radiological follow-up post-NOM for traumatic splenic injuries.
Methods: Conducting a systematic review following updated PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and trial registries from January 2010 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria covered studies on radiological follow-up for blunt splenic injuries.
Results: Out of 5794 studies, 17 were included involving 3392 patients. Various radiological modalities were used, with computed tomography (CT) being the most common. Vascular injuries occurred in 4.5% of patients, with most pseudoaneurysms diagnosed on day 2-6 post-trauma, and leading to intervention in 60% of these cases. Thirteen studies recommended routine follow-up, with six favouring CT, and seven supporting radiation-free modalities. Four studies proposed follow-up based on clinical indications, initial findings, or symptoms. Recommendations for specific timing of radiological follow-up ranged from 48 h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher.
Conclusion: Limited high-quality evidence exists on radiological follow-up in isolated blunt splenic injuries, causing uncertainty in clinical practice. However, our review suggests a reasonable need for follow-up, with contrast-enhanced ultrasound emerging as a promising alternative to CT. Specific timing and criteria for follow-up remain unresolved, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies to address these knowledge gaps.
期刊介绍:
Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.