Patient factors associated with embolization or splenectomy within 30 days of initiating surveillance for splenic trauma
- PMID: 39365384
- DOI: 10.1007/s10140-024-02285-3
Patient factors associated with embolization or splenectomy within 30 days of initiating surveillance for splenic trauma
Abstract
Background: Non-operative management of hemodynamically stable patients with splenic trauma has been recommended for more than 25 years, but in practice embolization and/or splenectomy (intervention) is often needed within the first 30 days. Identifying the risk factors associated with the need for intervention could support more individualized decision-making.
Methods: We used data from the SPLASH randomized clinical trial, a comparison of outcomes of surveillance or embolization. 140 patients were randomized, 133 retained in the study (embolization n = 66; surveillance n = 67) and 103 screened and registered in the non-inclusion register. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying covariates were used to identify risk factors contributing to embolization and/or splenectomy within 30 days after initiating surveillance only for splenic trauma.
Results: 123 patients (median age, 30 [23; 48] years; 91 (74%) male) initially received non-operative management. At the day-30 visit, 34 (27.6%) patients had undergone an intervention (31 (25.2%) delayed embolization and 4 (3.3%) splenectomy). Multivariate analysis identified patients with OIS grade 4 or 5 splenic trauma (HR = 4.51 [2.06-9.88]) and (HR = 34.5 [6.84-174]); respectively) and splenic complications: arterial leak (HR = 1.80 [1.45-2.24]), pseudoaneurysm (HR = 1.22 [1.06-1.40]) and pseudocyst (HR = 1.41 [1.21-1.64]) to be independently associated with increased risk of need for an intervention within 30 days of initiating surveillance.
Conclusions: Our study shows that more than 1 in 4 patients who received non-operative management needed embolization or splenectomy by day 30. Arterial leak, pseudoaneurysm, pseudocyst, and OIS grade 4 or 5 were independent risk factors linked to the need for an intervention.
Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02021396.
Keywords: Embolization; Risk factors; Splenectomy; Splenic trauma; Surveillance.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER).
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
-
- Bain IM, Kirby RM (1998) 10 year experience of splenic injury: an increasing place for conservative management after blunt trauma. Injury 29(3):177–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-1383(97)00170-8 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Stassen NA, Bhullar I, Cheng JD et al (2012) Selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury: an Eastern Association for the surgery of trauma practice management guideline. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 73(5 Suppl 4):S294–300. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3182702afc - DOI - PubMed
-
- Splenic Artery Embolization in Spleen Injury - Clinical Trials Registry - ICH GCP. Accessed October 23 (2023) https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT05008172
-
- Arvieux C, Frandon J, Tidadini F et al (2020) Effect of prophylactic embolization on patients with Blunt Trauma at High Risk of Splenectomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg 155(12):1102–1111. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.3672 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Zarzaur BL, Rozycki GS (2017) An update on nonoperative management of the spleen in adults. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open 2(1):e000075. https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2017-000075 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
