Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Dec;29(12):1465-73.
doi: 10.1007/s10096-010-1049-1. Epub 2010 Sep 19.

Assessment of splenic function

Affiliations
Review

Assessment of splenic function

A P N A de Porto et al. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010 Dec.

Abstract

Hyposplenic patients are at risk of overwhelming post-splenectomy infection (OPSI), which carries mortality of up to 70%. Therefore, preventive measures are warranted. However, patients with diminished splenic function are difficult to identify. In this review we discuss immunological, haematological and scintigraphic parameters that can be used to measure splenic function. IgM memory B cells are a potential parameter for assessing splenic function; however, more studies are necessary for its validation. Detection of Howell-Jolly bodies does not reflect splenic function accurately, whereas determining the percentage of pitted erythrocytes is a well-evaluated method and seems a good first-line investigation for assessing splenic function. When assessing spleen function, (99m)Tc-labelled, heat-altered, autologous erythrocyte scintigraphy with multimodality single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)-CT technology is the best approach, as all facets of splenic function are evaluated. In conclusion, although scintigraphic methods are most reliable, they are not suitable for screening large populations. We therefore recommend using the percentage of pitted erythrocytes, albeit suboptimal, as a first-line investigation and subsequently confirming abnormal readings by means of scintigraphy. More studies evaluating the value of potentially new markers are needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Styrt B. Infection associated with asplenia: risks, mechanisms, and prevention. Am J Med. 1990;88:33N–42N. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(90)90259-G. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Singer DB. Postsplenectomy sepsis. Perspect Pediatr Pathol. 1973;1:285–311. - PubMed
    1. Holdsworth RJ, Irving AD, Cuschieri A. Postsplenectomy sepsis and its mortality rate: actual versus perceived risks. Br J Surg. 1991;78:1031–1038. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800780904. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bisharat N, Omari H, Lavi I, Raz R. Risk of infection and death among post-splenectomy patients. J Infect. 2001;43:182–186. doi: 10.1053/jinf.2001.0904. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Okabayashi T, Hanazaki K. Overwhelming postsplenectomy infection syndrome in adults—a clinically preventable disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:176–179. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.176. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances