Spontaneous Retroperitoneal Haemorrhage: Efficacy of Conservative Management and Embolisation

Abstract

PurposeTo assess the efficacy of conservative management and embolisation in patients with spontaneous retroperitoneal haemorrhage.MethodsSingle-centre retrospective case–control study of patients with spontaneous retroperitoneal haemorrhage treated conservatively or with embolisation. Patients aged ≥ 18 years were identified from CT imaging reports stating a diagnosis of retroperitoneal haemorrhage or similar and images reviewed for confirmation. Exclusion criteria included recent trauma, surgery, retroperitoneal vascular line insertion, or other non-spontaneous aetiology.Datapoints analysed included treatment approach (conservative or embolisation), technical success, clinical success, and mortality outcome.ResultsA total of 54 patients met inclusion criteria, who were predominantly anticoagulated (74%), male (72%), older adults (mean age 69 years), with active haemorrhage on CT (52%). Overall mortality was 15%. Clinical success was more likely with conservative management (36/38) than embolisation (9/16; p < 0.01), and all-cause (1/38 vs 7/16; p < 0.01) and uncontrolled primary bleeding (1/38 vs 5/16; p < 0.01) mortality were higher with embolisation. However, embolised patients more commonly had active bleeding on CT (15/38 vs 13/16; p < 0.01), shock (5/38 vs 6/16; p < 0.04), and higher blood transfusion volumes (mean 2.2 vs 5.9 units; p < 0.01). After one-to-one propensity score matching, differences in clinical success (p = 0.04) and all-cause mortality (p = 0.01) remained; however, difference in uncontrolled primary bleeding mortality did not (p = 0.07).ConclusionConservative management of SRH is likely to be effective in most patients, even in those who are anticoagulated and haemodynamically unstable, with variable success seen after embolisation in a more unstable patient group, supporting the notion that resuscitation and optimisation of coagulation are the most vital components of treatment.