Are arteriograms necessary in penetrating zone II neck injuries?

Abstract

The evaluation and management of potential arterial injuries in penetrating neck trauma are controversial. Routine surgical exploration or arteriography can be very expensive and time-consuming and can overburden available resources if used in all patients. We reviewed the records of 4035 patients seen in our trauma center during a 20-month period and identified a total of 110 patients (2.7%) with penetrating wounds to zone II of the neck; 50 were from gunshot wounds, 43 from stab wounds, 7 from shotgun injuries, and 10 from lacerations. In 42 (39%) patients there was no arteriogram or surgery based on location of the wounds or lack of any physical findings. None of these patients later had any evidence of an arterial injury. Forty-five patients (40%) had arteriograms based on proximity or a “soft” sign of vascular injury, which included evidence of significant bleeding or a stable hematoma. A total of 15 injuries to major arteries were identified: 3 common carotid, 5 internal carotid, and 7 vertebral. One patient died during initial resuscitation, and four patients went directly to surgery with no preoperative arteriogram for active bleeding and expanding hematoma (n = 1), an expanding hematoma (n = 2), and a large, stable hematoma (n = 1). Only one patient (of the 110) had a significant major arterial injury requiring surgery that was not predicted by physical findings. Nine arterial injuries were treated nonoperatively: six vertebral, two common carotid intimal flaps, and one small distal internal carotid pseudoaneurysm (diagnosed late). Three additional minor external carotid artery injuries were observed with no adverse sequelae. Associated neck injuries included 8 to the larynx/trachea, 7 to the esophagus, 11 to the pharynx, and 9 to the spinal cord. Associated injuries caused seven other deaths in this series. These results indicate that clinical evaluation is highly accurate in determining which patients need surgical intervention. Arteriograms have too low a yield (< 1% in this study) of findings that alter treatment to justify routine application in these patients with zone II penetrating injuries. We have embarked on a prospective evaluation of the proper role of arteriography in this setting as a result of these data.