Blunt Splenic Injury Research Articles

Follow-up strategies after non-operative treatment of traumatic splenic injuries: a systematic review.

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. 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. 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 48h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher. 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.

Laparoscopic surgery: An effective alternative for managing severe blunt splenic injuries in patients who are ineligible for transcatheter arterial embolization

BackgroundTranscatheter arterial embolization (TAE) is an effective alternative to nonoperative management (NOM) to improve the spleen salvage rate for patients with blunt splenic injuries (BSIs), but it is not always available at some institutions. Moreover, laparoscopy has also been used to diagnose and treat trauma, including BSIs. MethodsWe present our 11-year experience in performing laparoscopic surgery for spleen salvage in patients with severe BSIs when TAE is infeasible. The outcomes of laparoscopic surgery or TAE for spleen salvage in hemodynamically stable patients with severe BSIs were compared. ResultsFifty-six patients underwent interventions for severe BSIs during this period. Twenty patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 36 underwent TAE. There were no significant differences in demographics, preoperative conditions, or clinical characteristics (all p > 0.05). In the laparoscopic surgery group, 15 patients (75%) underwent laparoscopic splenorrhaphy for spleen salvage surgery, and five (25%) required splenectomy. No complications requiring intervention were observed in the laparoscopic surgery group, whereas three patients in the TAE group required a late splenectomy for splenic abscess. No significant differences were detected in the splenic preservation rate, complication rate, or length of hospital stay between the groups (all p > 0.05). ConclusionLaparoscopy is feasible and safe for managing hemodynamically stable patients with severe BSIs, and the outcomes are comparable to those of TAE. When TAE is infeasible, laparoscopy can be considered an alternative to increase the spleen salvage rate.

Angioembolization in patients with blunt splenic trauma in Germany -guidelines vs. Reality a retrospective registry-based cohort study of the TraumaRegister DGU®.

Nonoperative management (NOM) for blunt splenic injuries (BSIs) is supported by both international and national guidelines in Germany, with high success rates even for severe organ injuries. Angioembolization (ANGIO) has been recommended for stabilizable patients with BSI requiring intervention since the 2016 German National Trauma Guideline. The objectives were to study treatment modalities in the adult BSI population according to different severity parameters including NOM, ANGIO and splenectomy in Germany. Between 2015 and 2020, a retrospective registry-based cohort study was performed on patients with BSIs with an Abbreviated Injury Score ≥ 2 in Germany using registry data from the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR DGU). This registry includes patients which were treated in a resuscitation room and spend more than 24-h in an intensive care unit or died in the resuscitation room. A total of 2,782 patients with BSIs were included in the analysis. ANGIO was used in 28 patients (1.0%). NOM was performed in 57.5% of all patients, predominantly those with less severe organ injuries measured by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale (AAST) ≤ 2. The splenectomy rate for patients with an AAST ≥ 3 was 58.5%, and the overall mortality associated with BSI was 15%. In this cohort splenic injuries AAST ≥ 3 were predominantly managed surgically and ANGIO was rarely used to augment NOM. Therefore, clinical reality deviates from guideline recommendations regarding the use of ANGIO and NOM. Local interdisciplinary treatment protocols might close that gap in the future.

Transarterial embolization to treat hemodynamically unstable trauma patients with splenic injuries: A retrospective multicenter observational study

PurposeWe described clinical outcomes for patients with blunt splenic injuries treated with transarterial embolization (TAE) based on their hemodynamic status. Materials and MethodsThis is a retrospective two-center study of adult patients with splenic injuries who underwent emergency TAE between January 2011 and December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups; hemodynamically unstable (HDU) and hemodynamically stable (HDS) patients. HDU patients were defined as transient- or non-responders to fluid resuscitation and HDS as responders. When immediate laparotomy was not possible for HDU patients, angiography and embolization were performed. The primary outcome was the survival discharge rate. Rebleeding and splenectomy rate was also investigated. ResultsOf 38 patients underwent emergency TAE for splenic trauma, 17 were HDU patients and 21 were HDS patients. The survival discharge rate was 88.2 % (15/17) in the HDU- and 100 % in HDS patients (p = 0.193). Rebleeding rate was 23.5 % (4/17) in HDU- and 5.0 % (1/21) in HDS patients (p = 0.15). Splenectomy was required for one HDU patient (5.9 %) for rebleeding. ConclusionThe survival discharge rate of TAE for splenic trauma in HDU patients was acceptable with a low rate of splenectomy. Further comparative studies of TAE versus operative management in HDU patients are needed to prove the usefulness of TAE.

Prophylactic embolization versus observation for high-grade blunt trauma splenic injury: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

The objective of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of prophylactic angioembolization with observation as primary management strategies for patients with high-grade (grades 3-5) blunt trauma splenic injury. The spleen is frequently injured in abdominal trauma. Historical management practices involved splenectomy, but more recent evidence suggests an increased risk of severe infections and sepsis associated with this approach. Accordingly, non-operative management strategies, including prophylactic splenic artery embolization and clinical observation, have gained prominence. This systematic review with meta-analysis directly compares angioembolization with clinical observation for high-grade splenic injuries only, aiming to provide clarity on this matter amid ongoing debates and variations in clinical practice. This review included adult patients aged 15 years or older with high-grade splenic injuries (grade 3-5) due to blunt trauma. Outcomes of interest include the need for further intervention (failure of management), mortality, complications, red blood cell transfusion requirements, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit length of stay. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost), was performed with no restrictions on language or publication date. Gray literature was searched, including trial registries and relevant conference proceedings. After deduplication, 2 reviewers independently assessed titles and abstracts, and, subsequently, full-text articles for eligibility. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using standardized instruments from JBI. Data was extracted using predefined templates, and statistical meta-analysis was performed, where possible, using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using statistical methods, and potential publication bias was tested with a funnel plot. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. Sixteen studies were included in this review. Methodological quality assessment indicated some risk of bias in most studies, with concerns primarily related to differences in injury severity and potential confounding factors. Meta-analysis revealed that prophylactic angioembolization significantly reduced risk of management failure by 57% (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.68, I2=53%, 15 studies) and decreased patient mortality by 37% (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93, I2=0%, 9 studies) compared with clinical observation alone. There was a 47% reduction in risk of complications associated with prophylactic embolization compared with clinical observation (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.95, I2=0%, 4 studies). Some statistical heterogeneity was observed, with I2 ranging from 0% to 53%. No significant differences were observed between the 2 management strategies for red blood cell transfusion requirements and hospital length of stay. The results of this study support the use of prophylactic embolization for high-grade blunt trauma splenic injuries, indicated by lower failure of management rates, reduced need for additional interventions, lower mortality, and fewer complications. PROSPERO CRD42023420220.

Splenic artery embolization in the treatment of blunt splenic injury: single level 1 trauma center experience.

To describe the experience of a single level 1 trauma center in the management of blunt splenic injuries (BSI). This is a retrospective study with Institutional Review Board approval. The medical records of 450 patients with BSI treated between January 2016 and December 2022 were reviewed. Seventy-two patients were treated with splenic artery embolization (SAE), met the study criteria, and were eligible for data analysis. Spleen injuries were graded in accordance with the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale. Univariate data analysis was performed, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. The splenic salvage rate was 90.3% (n = 65/72). Baseline demographics were similar between the groups (P > 0.05). Distal embolization with Gelfoam® had similar rates of splenic salvage to proximal embolization with coils (90% vs. 94.1%, P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the rate of splenic infarction between distal embolization with Gelfoam® (20%, 4/20) and proximal embolization with coils (17.6%, 3/17) (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in procedure length (68 vs. 75.8 min) or splenic salvage rate (88.5% vs. 92.1%) between proximal and distal embolization (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in procedure length (69.1 vs. 73.6 min) or splenic salvage rate (93.1% vs. 86.4%) between Gelfoam® and coil embolization (P > 0.05). Combined proximal and distal embolization was associated with a higher rate of splenic abscess formation (25%, 2/8) when compared with proximal (0%, 0/26) or distal (0%, 0/38) embolization alone (P = 0.0003). The rate of asymptomatic and symptomatic splenic infarction was significantly higher in patients embolized at combined proximal and distal locations (P = 0.04, P = 0.01). The endovascular management of BSI is safe and effective. The overall splenic salvage rate was 90.3%. Distal embolization with Gelfoam® was not associated with higher rates of splenic infarction when compared with proximal embolization with coils. Combined proximal and distal embolization was associated with a higher incidence of splenic infarction and splenic abscess formation. Distal splenic embolization with Gelfoam® is safe and may be beneficial in the setting of blunt splenic trauma.

The Management and Outcomes in Blunt Splenic Injury: A Comparison Between a Rural and Urban Trauma Center

Introduction: The management of blunt splenic trauma (BST) has evolved over the last 20 years, with nonoperative management in hemodynamically stable patients prevailing as the standard of care. Nonoperative management includes angioembolization of the splenic artery. Although non-operative management has increased in use, there is limited standardization of practices for the management of blunt splenic trauma. The objective was to compare outcomes for BST and the use of angioembolization between a Level 1 urban trauma center, Ascension St. John Hospital, Detroit MI (ASJH) and a Level 2 rural trauma center, Munson Medical Center, Traverse City MI (MMC). Methods: Our study used registry data comprising all patients from 1/2015-12/2021 who presented to ASJH and MMC with BST. Patients were divided into operative intervention versus non-operative management groups. Data collected included timing of intervention, length of stay, severity scores, blood product requirements and concomitant injuries. The management and outcomes between the two institutions were compared. Data were analyzed using Student’s t-test, the χ2 test, the Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regression. Results: Data were collected on 93 patients from ASJH and 189 patients from MMC. Splenic injury grade was scored from one to five, with 60.0% of patients scoring grade three or higher and 62.1% of patients having active blush identified on imaging. Eighty-four patients (28.4%) had operative intervention and 24 patients (8.5%) underwent angioembolization. ASJH had an angioembolization rate of 15.1% vs 5.3% at MMC (p=0.006). When comparing the two hospitals, patient groups were different in terms of race (p=0.001), fresh frozen plasma administered (p=0.046) and presenting systolic blood pressure (p=0.001). In patients with active blush, after adjusting for hemoglobin on arrival, ASJH patients were 3.8 times more likely to have angioembolization than patients at Munson (p=0.02). TRISS and race dropped out of the model. Conclusions: There is a significant difference in the rate of non-operative management between the hospitals. Higher rates of angioembolization at an urban center may reflect a difference in resource distribution between urban and rural centers.

Standardizing quality utilization of interventional radiology treatments of blunt splenic injury: SQUIRTS study

ObjectivesNonoperative management (NOM) of blunt splenic injury (BSI) is well accepted in appropriate patients. Splenic artery embolization (SAE) in higher-grade injuries likely plays an important role in increasing the success of NOM. We previously implemented a protocol requiring referral of all BSI grades III-V undergoing NOM for SAE. It is unknown the risk of complications as well as longitudinal outcomes. We aimed to examine the splenic salvage rate and safety profile of the protocol. We hypothesized the splenic salvage rate would be high and complications would be low. MethodsA retrospective study was performed at our Level 1 trauma center over a 9-year period. Injury characteristics and outcomes in patients sustaining BSI grades III-V were collected. Outcomes were compared for NOM on protocol (SAE) and off protocol (no angiography or angiography but no embolization). Complications for angiographies were examined. ResultsBetween January 2010 and February 2019, 570 patients had grade III-V BSI. NOM was attempted in 359 (63 %) with overall salvage rate of 91 % (328). Of these, 305 were on protocol while 54 were off protocol (41 no angiography and 13 angiography but no SAE). During the study period, for every grade of injury a pattern was seen of a higher salvage rate in the on-protocol group when compared to the off-protocol group (Grade III, 97 %(181/187) vs. 89 %(32/36), Grade IV, 91 %(98/108) vs. 69 %(9/13) and Grade V, 80 %(8/10 vs. 0 %(0/5). The overall salvage rate was 94 %(287) on protocol vs. 76 %(41) off protocol (p < 0.001, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test). Complications occurred in only 8 of the 318 who underwent angiography (2 %). These included 5 access complications and 3 abscesses. ConclusionThe use of a protocol requiring routine splenic artery embolization for all high-grade spleen injuries slated for non-operative management is safe with a very low complication rate. NOM with splenic angioembolization failure rate is improved as compared to non-SAE patients’ at all higher grades of injury. Thus, SAE for all hemodynamically stable patients of all high-grade types should be considered as a primary form of therapy for such injuries.

Assessing associated factors for failure of nonoperative management in pediatric blunt liver and spleen injuries: a secondary analysis of the SHIPPs study.

The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of pediatric patients who underwent nonoperative management (NOM) for blunt splenic and hepatic injuries and to explore factors associated with NOM failure. This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study of pediatric patients with blunt liver and spleen injuries in Japan. Participants included pediatric trauma patients aged 16years or younger between 2008 and 2019 with NOM, which was defined as no surgery provided within 6h of hospital arrival. NOM failure, defined as abdominal surgery performed after 6h of hospital arrival, was the primary outcome. Descriptive statistics were provided and exploratory analysis to assess the associations with outcome using logistic regression. During the study period, 1339 met our eligibility criteria. The median age was 9years, with a majority being male. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 10. About 14.0% required transfusion within 24h, and 22.3% underwent interventional radiology procedures. NOM failure occurred in 1.0% of patients and the in-hospital mortality was 0.7%. Factors associated with NOM failure included age, positive focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST), contrast extravasation on computed tomography (CT), severe liver injury, concomitant pancreas injury, concomitant gastrointestinal injury, concomitant mesenteric injury, and ISS. In our study, NOM failure were rare. Older age, positive FAST, contrast extravasation on CT, severe liver injury, concomitant pancreas injury, concomitant gastrointestinal injury, concomitant mesenteric injury, and higher ISS were suggested as possible risk factors for NOM failure.

Out with the old, in with the new? The revised AAST grading schema better predicts splenic salvage but not splenectomy

BackgroundThe revised American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) organ injury scale (OIS) for splenic injury incorporates radiologic features but the implications of this are unknown. We hypothesized that the revised AAST-OIS would better predict outcomes. MethodsPatients with a blunt splenic injury admitted to a Level I trauma center were reviewed from 2016 to 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for splenectomy were calculated for high-grade injuries (AAST-OIS grades IV-V) using both schemas. ResultsOf the 852 patients analyzed, 48.5% were observed, 24.6% were embolized, and the remaining underwent operative intervention. The median AAST-OIS increased from II to III (p ​< ​0.01). Sensitivity (38.0% vs. 73.7%) and NPV (80.9% vs. 88.2%) for splenectomy increased for high-grade injuries but specificity (93.5% vs 70.1%) and PPV (67.5% vs 46.7%) decreased. ConclusionThe revised AAST-OIS better predicted splenic salvage but is less accurate at predicting need for splenectomy.

Pediatric trauma patients with isolated grade III blunt splenic injuries may be safely managed without intensive care unit admission

BackgroundNon-operative management is the standard of care for pediatric blunt splenic injury. The American Pediatric Surgical Association recommends intensive care unit monitoring only for grade IV/V blunt splenic injury; however, variation remains regarding this practice. We hypothesized that pediatric trauma patients with near-isolated grade III blunt splenic injuries admitted to a non-intensive care unit setting would have similar outcomes to those admitted to the intensive care unit. MethodsThe 2017 to 2019 Trauma Quality Improvement Program database was queried for blunt pediatric trauma patients (≤16 years) with near-isolated grade III blunt splenic injuries. Patients with systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg or heart rate >90 were excluded. Pediatric trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit were compared to non-intensive care unit admissions. The primary outcome was splenectomy. Bivariate analyses were performed. ResultsOf 461 pediatric trauma patients with near-isolated grade III blunt splenic injuries, 186 (40.3%) were admitted to the intensive care unit. Intensive care unit patients were older than their non-intensive care unit counterparts (15 vs 14 years, P = .03). Intensive care unit and non-intensive care unit patients had a similar rate of splenectomy (0.5% vs 0.7%, P = .80) and time to surgery (19.7 vs 19.8 hours, P = .98). Patients admitted to the intensive care unit had a longer length of stay (4 vs 3 days, P < .001). There were no significant complications or deaths in either group. ConclusionThis national analysis demonstrated that hemodynamically stable pediatric trauma patients with near-isolated grade III blunt splenic injuries admitted to the floor or intensive care unit had a similar rate of splenectomy without complications or deaths. This aligns with American Pediatric Surgical Association recommendations that pediatric trauma patients with grade III blunt splenic injuries be managed in non-intensive care unit settings. Widespread adoption is warranted and should lead to decreased healthcare expenditures.

Level III Trauma Centers Achieve Comparable Outcomes in Blunt Splenic Injury as Level I Centers.

Identifying patients who can be safely managed in lower-level trauma centers is critical to avoid overburdening level I centers. This study examines the transfer patterns and outcomes of blunt splenic injury (BSI) patients cared for at 2 regional level III trauma centers as compared to an associated level I center. A retrospective cohort study was conducted including all trauma patients with BSI admitted to 2 level III trauma centers (TC3) and a level I center (TC1) between 2012 and 2022. Patients were broken into 3 categories: TC1, TC3, and transfer patients (transferred from TC3 to TC1). A total of 1480 patients were admitted to TC1, 208 patients to TC3, and 128 were transferred. 22.7% of transfer patients were children. No difference in splenic injury grade was seen between patients managed at TC1 and TC3. Patients presenting to TC1 had more severe concomitant injuries. Patients underwent urgent splenectomy at similar rates at TC1 and TC3 (15.1 vs 18.7%, P = .1). Successful nonoperative management was achieved at similar rates (81.3 vs 75.5%, P = .1). When controlling for ISS and ED disposition, there was no significant difference in length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and inpatient mortality between TC1 and TC3. Level III centers effectively managed BSI achieving comparable outcomes to the level 1 center. Transfers commonly occurred in pediatric and multisystem trauma patients, though high-grade splenic injuries were not predictive of transfer. High-grade BSI can be safely managed at level III centers without need for transfer.

Comparative effectiveness of angioembolization versus open surgery in patients with blunt splenic injury

The effectiveness and safety of transcatheter splenic artery embolization (SAE) compared to those of open surgery in patients with blunt splenic injury (BSI) remain unclear. This retrospective cohort-matched study utilized data from the Japan Trauma Data Bank recorded between 2004 and 2019. Patients with BSI who underwent SAE or open surgery were selected. A propensity score matching analysis was used to balance the baseline covariates and compare outcomes, including all-cause in-hospital mortality and spleen salvage. From 361,706 patients recorded in the data source, this study included 2,192 patients with BSI who underwent SAE or open surgery. A propensity score matching analysis was used to extract 377 matched pairs of patients. The in-hospital mortality rates (SAE, 11.6% vs. open surgery, 11.2%, adjusted relative risk (aRR): 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38–1.09, p = 0.10) were similar in both the groups. However, spleen salvage was significantly less achieved in the open surgery group than in the SAE group (SAE, 87.1% vs. open surgery, 32.1%; aRR: 2.84, 95%CI: 2.29–3.51, p < 0.001). Survival rates did not significantly differ between BSI patients undergoing SAE and those undergoing open surgery. Nonetheless, SAE was notably associated with a higher likelihood of successful spleen salvage.

Angioembolization for splenic injuries: does it help? Retrospective evaluation of grade III–V splenic injuries at two level I trauma centers

BackgroundSplenic angioembolization (SAE) has increased in utilization for blunt splenic injuries. We hypothesized lower SAE usage would not correlate with higher rates of additional intervention or mortality when choosing initial...

Size of Splenic Subcapsular Hematoma Is Associated With Varying Outcomes of Nonoperative Management.

The presence of a splenic subcapsular hematoma (SCH) has been associated with higher rates of failure of nonoperative management (FNOM) in patients with blunt splenic injury (BSI), with rates up to 80%. We hypothesized that contemporary rates are lower. A retrospective review was conducted of patients admitted with BSI to a level I trauma center (2016-2021). Patients with SCH who had FNOM were compared to those who did not. There were 661 BSI patients, of which 102 (15.4%) had SCH. Among the SCH patients, 8 (7.8%) had FNOM. Failure of nonoperative management was higher in patients who had a SCH measuring 15mm or greater. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study to date examining the relationship between SCH and FNOM. The presence of a SCH alone is not associated with a high risk for FNOM contrary to previous literature. However, SCH thickness was larger in those who failed.

Pre- and post-implementation protocol for non-operative management of grade III-V splenic injuries: An observational study

BackgroundGrade (III–V) blunt splenic injuries (BSI) in hemodynamically stable patients represent clinical challenges for successful non-operative management (NOM). In 2014, Our institution proposed a treatment protocol requiring splenic angiography and embolization for stable, intermediate, and high-grade BSI. It also included a follow-up CT scan for grade III BSI. We sought to assess the success rate of NOM in treating intermediate and high-grade BSI, following a standardized treatment protocol at a level 1 trauma center. MethodsAn observational retrospective study was conducted. Data of patients with BSI from June 2011 to September 2019 were reviewed using the Qatar National Trauma Registry. Patients’ demographics, CT scan and angiographic findings, grade of splenic injuries, and outcomes were analyzed. The pre- and post-implementation of treatment protocol periods were compared. ResultsDuring the study period, a total of 552 hemodynamically stable patients with BSI were admitted, of which 240 had BSI with grade III to V. Eighty-one patients (33.8%) were admitted in the pre-protocol implementation period and 159 (66.2%) in the post-protocol implementation period. The NOM rate increased from 50.6% in the pre-protocol group to 65.6% in the post-protocol group (p = 0.02). In addition, failure of the conservative treatment did not significantly differ in the two periods, while the requirement for blood transfusion dropped from 64.2% to 45.9% (p = 0.007). The frequency of CT scan follow-up (55.3% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.001) and splenic arterial embolization (32.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.001) in NOM patients increased significantly in the post-protocol group compared to the pre-protocol group. Overall mortality was similar between the two periods. However, hospital and ICU length of stay and ventilatory days were higher in the post-protocol group. ConclusionsNOM is an effective and safe treatment option for grade III-V BSI patients. Using standardized treatment guidelines for intermediate-to high-grade splenic injuries could increase the success rate for NOM and limit unnecessary laparotomy. Moreover, angioembolization is a crucial adjunct to NOM that could improve the success rate.

Contemporary Management of Blunt Splenic Trauma in Adults: An Analysis of the Trauma Quality Improvement Program Registry

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of management strategies for blunt splenic injuries in adult patients. MethodsPatients 18 years and older with blunt splenic injuries registered via the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2013-2019) were identified. Management strategies initiated within 24 hours of hospital presentation were classified as watchful waiting, embolization, surgery, or combination therapy. Patients were stratified by injury grade. Linear models estimated each strategy’s effect on hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, and mortality. ResultsOf 81,033 included patients, 86.3%, 10.9%, 2.5%, and 0.3% of patients received watchful waiting, surgery, embolization, and combination therapy, respectively. Among patients with low-grade injuries and compared with surgery, embolization was associated with shorter hospital LOS (9.4 days, Q < .001, Cohen’s d = .30) and ICU LOS (5.0 days, Q < .001, Cohen’s d = .44). Among patients with high-grade injuries and compared with surgery, embolization was associated with shorter hospital LOS (8.7 days, Q < .001, Cohen’s d = .12) and ICU LOS (4.5 days, Q < .001, Cohen’s d = .23). Among patients with low- and high-grade injuries, the odds ratios for in-hospital mortality associated with surgery compared with embolization were 4.02 (Q < .001) and 4.38 (Q < .001), respectively. ConclusionsAmong patients presenting with blunt splenic injuries and compared with surgery, embolization was associated with shorter hospital LOS, shorter ICU LOS, and lower risk for mortality.

Tratamiento conservador no invasivo del traumatismo esplénico

Background: Non-invasive conservative treatment of splenic trauma reduces the rate of unnecessary surgical interventions and depends on the type of healthcare center involved. Objective: The aim of this study is to describe the outcomes of non-invasive conservative treatment in patients with blunt abdominal trauma and splenic injury and their correlation with the preoperative variables. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective and observational study of patients admitted with blunt abdominal trauma and splenic injury between 2012 and 2022. The variables analyzed were kinematics of trauma, lesion severity on computed tomography images, amount of hemoperitoneum, type of unit of hospitalization and results of non-invasive conservative treatment. Results: Among 102 patients, the most common kinematics of trauma was motorcycle-to-car collisions (47.1%); the success rate of non-invasive conservative treatment was 66.6%, and was associated with lesion severity on computed tomography images (p &lt; 0.001), amount of hemoperitoneum (p &lt; 0.001), presence of other injuries (p &lt; 0.001), severe trauma brain injury (p &lt; 0.009), and type of unit of hospitalization (p &lt; 0.002). Conclusion: Despite the absence of recommended human and technological resources, the results of non-invasive conservative treatment in this series were comparable to those obtained in high complexity centers.

When is it safe to start thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization?

BackgroundThromboprophylaxis after blunt splenic trauma is complicated by the risk of bleeding, but the risk after angioembolization is unknown. We hypothesized that earlier thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with increased bleeding complications without mitigating venous thromboembolism events. MethodsAll blunt trauma patients who underwent splenic angioembolization within 24 hours of arrival were identified from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program datasets from 2017 to 2019. Cases with <24-hour length of stay, other serious injuries, and surgery before angioembolization were excluded. Venous thromboembolism was defined as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Bleeding complications were defined as splenic surgery, additional embolization, or blood transfusion after thromboprophylaxis initiation. Data were compared with χ2 analysis and multivariate logistic regression at P < .05. ResultsIn 1,102 patients, 84% had American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade III to V splenic injuries, and 73% received thromboprophylaxis. Splenic surgery after angioembolization was more common in those with thromboprophylaxis initiation within the first 24 hours (5.7% vs 1.7%, P = .007), whereas those with the initiation of thromboprophylaxis after 72 hours were more likely to have a pulmonary embolism (2.3% vs 0.2%, P = .001). Overall, venous thromboembolism increased considerably when thromboprophylaxis was initiated after day 3. In multivariate analysis, time to thromboprophylaxis initiation was associated with bleeding (odds ratio 0.74 [95% confidence interval 0.58–0.94]) and venous thromboembolism complications (odds ratio 1.5 [95% confidence interval 1.20–1.81]). ConclusionThis national study evaluates bleeding and thromboembolic risk to elucidate the specific timing of thromboprophylaxis after splenic angioembolization. Initiation of thromboprophylaxis between 24 and 72 hours achieves the safest balance in minimizing bleeding and venous thromboembolism risk, with 48 hours particularly serving as the ideal time for protocolized administration.

An ASER AI/ML expert panel formative user research study for an interpretable interactive splenic AAST grading graphical user interface prototype.

The AAST Organ Injury Scale is widely adopted for splenic injury severity but suffers from only moderate inter-rater agreement. This work assesses SpleenPro, a prototype interactive explainable artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) diagnostic aid to support AAST grading, for effects on radiologist dwell time, agreement, clinical utility, and user acceptance. Two trauma radiology ad hoc expert panelists independently performed timed AAST grading on 76 admission CT studies with blunt splenic injury, first without AI/ML assistance, and after a 2-month washout period and randomization, with AI/ML assistance. To evaluate user acceptance, three versions of the SpleenPro user interface with increasing explainability were presented to four independent expert panelists with four example cases each. A structured interview consisting of Likert scales and free responses was conducted, with specific questions regarding dimensions of diagnostic utility (DU); mental support (MS); effort, workload, and frustration (EWF); trust and reliability (TR); and likelihood of future use (LFU). SpleenPro significantly decreased interpretation times for both raters. Weighted Cohen's kappa increased from 0.53 to 0.70 with AI/ML assistance. During user acceptance interviews, increasing explainability was associated with improvement in Likert scores for MS, EWF, TR, and LFU. Expert panelists indicated the need for a combined early notification and grading functionality, PACS integration, and report autopopulation to improve DU. SpleenPro was useful for improving objectivity of AAST grading and increasing mental support. Formative user research identified generalizable concepts including the need for a combined detection and grading pipeline and integration with the clinical workflow.