The role of splenic angioembolization as an adjunct to nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:68
|
作者
Crichton, James Charles Ian [1 ]
Naidoo, Kamil [2 ,3 ]
Yet, Barbaros [2 ,3 ]
Brundage, Susan I. [2 ,3 ]
Perkins, Zane [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Waikato Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, Hamilton, New Zealand
[2] Queen Mary Univ London, Barts, England
[3] London Sch Med & Dent, London, England
来源
关键词
Spleen; angioembolization; nonoperative management; blunt trauma; ARTERY EMBOLIZATION; NONSURGICAL MANAGEMENT; AMERICAN ASSOCIATION; SUCCESS RATE; TRAUMA; OUTCOMES; SURGERY; COMPLICATIONS; IMPACT; BLUSH;
D O I
10.1097/TA.0000000000001649
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Nonoperative management (NOM) of hemodynamically normal patients with blunt splenic injury (BSI) is the standard of care. Guidelines recommend additional splenic angioembolization (SAE) in patients with American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) Grade IV and Grade V BSI, but the role of SAE in Grade III injuries is unclear and controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the safety and effectiveness of SAE as an adjunct to NOM versus NOM alone in adults with BSI. METHODS: A systematic literature search (Medline, Embase, and CINAHL) was performed to identify original studies that compared outcomes in adult BSI patients treated with SAE or NOM alone. Primary outcome was failure of NOM. Secondary outcomes included morbidity, mortality, hospital length of stay, and transfusion requirements. Bayesian meta-analyses were used to calculate an absolute (risk difference) and relative (risk ratio [RR]) measure of treatment effect for each outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (6,684 patients) were included. For Grades I to V combined, there was no difference in NOM failure rate (SAE, 8.6% vs NOM, 7.7%; RR, 1.09 [0.80-1.51]; p = 0.28), mortality (SAE, 4.8% vs NOM, 5.8%; RR, 0.82 [0.45-1.31]; p = 0.81), hospital length of stay (11.3 vs 9.5 days; p = 0.06), or blood transfusion requirements (1.8 vs 1.7 units; p = 0.47) between patients treated with SAE and those treated with NOM alone. However, morbidity was significantly higher in patients treated with SAE (SAE, 38.1% vs NOM, 18.6%; RR, 1.83 [1.20-2.66]; p < 0.01). When stratified by grade of splenic injury, SAE significantly reduced the failure rate of NOM in patients with Grade IV and Grade V splenic injuries but had minimal effect in those with Grade I to Grade III injuries. CONCLUSION: Splenic angioembolization should be strongly considered as an adjunct to NOM in patients with AAST Grade IV and Grade V BSI but should not be routinely recommended in patients with AAST Grade I to Grade III injuries. Copyright (C) 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:934 / 943
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT OF BLUNT SPLENIC TRAUMA IN ADULTS
    KLIN, B
    RIVKIND, A
    KRAUSZ, Y
    RABINOVICI, R
    CHISIN, R
    EYAL, Z
    INTERNATIONAL SURGERY, 1990, 75 (01) : 50 - 53
  • [32] NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT FOR ADULTS WITH BLUNT SPLENIC TRAUMA
    TEMPLE, WJ
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1991, 34 (01) : 7 - 8
  • [33] NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT OF BLUNT SPLENIC TRAUMA IN ADULTS
    STEPHEN, WJ
    ROY, PD
    SMITH, PM
    STEPHEN, WJ
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1991, 34 (01) : 27 - 29
  • [34] Safety of selective nonoperative management for blunt splenic trauma: The impact of concomitant injuries
    Teuben M.P.J.
    Spijkerman R.
    Blokhuis T.J.
    Pfeifer R.
    Teuber H.
    Pape H.-C.
    Leenen L.P.H.
    Patient Safety in Surgery, 12 (1)
  • [35] Proximal Splenic Angioembolization Does Not Improve Outcomes in Treating Blunt Splenic Injuries Compared With Splenectomy: A Cohort Analysis DISCUSSION
    Haan, James
    Duchesne, Juan
    Brothman, Sheldon
    Davis, Kimberly
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 2008, 65 (06): : 1351 - 1353
  • [36] Interventional radiology versus operative management for splenic injuries: a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Kashiura, Masahiro
    Yada, Noritaka
    Yamakawa, Kazuma
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (08):
  • [37] Nonoperative Management of Blunt Splenic Trauma: Outcomes of Gelfoam Embolization of the Splenic Artery
    Freeman, Carl
    Moran, Vicki
    Fang, Adam
    Israel, Heidi
    Ma, Shuran
    Vyas, Kena
    JOURNAL OF EMERGENCIES TRAUMA AND SHOCK, 2018, 11 (04) : 293 - 297
  • [38] Overview of Nonoperative Blunt Splenic Injury Management with Associated Splenic Artery Pseudoaneurysm
    Morrison, Chet A.
    Gross, Brian W.
    Kauffman, Matthew
    Rittenhouse, Katelyn J.
    Rogers, Frederick B.
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2017, 83 (06) : 554 - 558
  • [39] Delayed splenic vascular injury after nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma
    Furlan, Alessandro
    Tublin, Mitchell E.
    Rees, Mitchell A.
    Nicholas, Dederia H.
    Sperry, Jason L.
    Alarcon, Louis H.
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2017, 211 : 87 - 94
  • [40] SPLENIC INJURIES IN ADULTS - SELECTIVE NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
    JOHNSON, H
    SHATNEY, CH
    SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1986, 79 (01) : 5 - 8