Changes in the Management of Injuries to the Liver and Spleen

Traumatic Isolated Right Lobe Devascularization of the Liver: An Unusual Case

Isolated liver lobe devascularization is a very rare case, with conflicting literature regarding management. We describe a very unusual case of traumatic isolated right lobe devascularization of the liver with its attendant management challenges. An eight-year-old boy with a history of road traffic accidents presented with abdominal pain. Although the child was hemodynamically stable on presentation, extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma was positive. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) scan of the torso revealed a nonenhancing right lobe of the liver involving segments 5-8 and the gross hemoperitoneum. Nonoperative management was tried. There were persistent high-grade fever spikes, for which prophylactic antibiotics were started, but the fever workup was negative. Abdominal drains were inserted to drain fluid and relieve distress. Output was noted to be bilious on day 21 of injury. Diagnostic laparoscopy on day 22 revealed hypertrophied left lobe of the liver with an absent (autolyzed) right lobe. The subsequent ward course was uneventful, and the child was discharged in stable condition. Thus, the indication of surgery in such cases is clinical deterioration, not radiological findings. Management should be in a dedicated trauma center with immediate operating room availability.

A novel inflatable device for perihepatic packing and hepatic hemorrhage control: A proof-of-concept study

INTRODUCTION

Uncontrolled bleeding is the primary cause of death in complex liver trauma and perihepatic packing is regularly utilized for hemorrhage control. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a novel inflatable device (the airbag) for perihepatic packing using a validated liver injury damage control model in swine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The image of the human liver was digitally isolated within an abdominal computerized tomography scan to produce a silicone model of the liver to mold the airbag. Two medical grade polyurethane sheets were thermal bonded to the configuration of the liver avoiding compression of the hepatic pedicle, hepatic veins, and the suprahepatic vena cava after inflation. Yorkshire pigs (n = 22) underwent controlled hemorrhagic shock (35% of the total blood volume), hypothermia, and fluid resuscitation to reproduce the indications for damage control surgery (coagulopathy, hypothermia, and acidosis) prior to a liver injury. A 3 × 10 cm rectangular segment of the left middle lobe of the liver was removed to create the injury. Subsequently, the animals were randomized into 4 groups for liver damage control (240 min), Sponge Pack (n = 6), Pressurized Airbag (n = 6), Vacuum Airbag (n = 6), and Uncontrolled (n = 4). Animals were monitored throughout the experiment and blood samples obtained.

RESULTS

Perihepatic packing with the pressurized airbag led to significantly higher mean arterial pressure during the liver damage control phase compared to sponge pack and vacuum airbag 52 mmHg (SD 2.3), 44.9 mmHg (SD 2.1), and 32 mmHg (SD 2.3), respectively (p < 0.0001), ejection fraction was also higher in that group. Hepatic hemorrhage was significantly lower in the pressurized airbag group compared to sponge pack, vacuum airbag, and uncontrolled groups; respectively 225 ml (SD 160), 611 ml (SD 123), 991 ml (SD 385), 1162 ml (SD 137) (p < 0001). Rebleeding after perihepatic packing removal was also significantly lower in the pressurized airbag group; respectively 32 ml (SD 47), 630 ml (SD 185), 513 ml (SD 303), (p = 0.0004). Intra-abdominal pressure remained similar to baseline, 1.9 mmHg (SD 1), (p = 0.297). Histopathology showed less necrosis at the border of the liver injury site with the pressurized airbag.

CONCLUSION

The pressurized airbag was significantly more effective at controlling hepatic hemorrhage and improving hemodynamics than the traditional sponge pack technique. Rebleeding after perihepatic packing removal was negligible with the pressurized airbag and it did not provoke hepatic injury.

Factors Affecting the Severity of Placental Abruption in Pregnant Vehicle Drivers: Analysis with a Novel Finite Element Model

We clarified factors affecting the severity of placental abruption in motor vehicle collisions by quantitively analyzing the area of placental abruption in a numerical simulation of an unrestrained pregnant vehicle driver at collision velocities of 3 and 6 m/s. For the simulation, we constructed a novel finite element model of a small 30-week pregnant woman, which was validated anthropometrically using computed tomography data and biomechanically using previous examinations of post-mortem human subjects. In the simulation, stress in the elements of the utero–placental interface was computed, and those elements exceeding a failure criterion were considered to be abrupted. It was found that a doubling of the collision velocity increased the area of placental abruption 10-fold, and the abruption area was approximately 20% for a collision velocity of 6 m/s, which is lower than the speed limit for general roads. This result implies that even low-speed vehicle collisions have negative maternal and fetal outcomes owing to placental abruption without a seatbelt restraint. Additionally, contact to the abdomen, 30 mm below the umbilicus, led to a larger placental abruption area than contact at the umbilicus level when the placenta was located at the uterus fundus. The results support that a reduction in the collision speed and seatbelt restraint at a suitable position are important to decrease the placental abruption area and therefore protect a pregnant woman and her fetus in a motor vehicle collision.

Hepatic trauma

Management of trauma-related liver injury has undergone a paradigm shift over the past four decades. In hemodynamically stable patients, the standard of care in the majority of level-one trauma centers has shifted to nonoperative management with high success rates, especially with low-grade liver injuries (i.e., grade I and II liver injuries). Advances in critical care medicine, cross-sectional imaging, and transarterial embolization techniques have led to the improvement of patient outcomes and decreased mortality rates in patients with arterial injuries. Currently, no consensus guidelines on appropriate patient selection criteria have been published by the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) or the American Association for the surgery of Trauma (AAST). Based off the current literature, nonoperative management with hepatic angiography and transarterial embolization (TAE) should be the treatment of choice in hemodynamically stable patients with clinical suspicion of arterial injury. TAE has been shown to improve success rates of nonoperative management and is well tolerated by most patients with low complication rates. Hepatic necrosis is the most common and concerning reported complication but can be reduced with selective approach and choice of embolic agent. The majority of literature supporting the use of TAE for trauma-related liver injury consists of retrospective case series and additional larger scale studies are needed to determine the efficacy of TAE in this setting. However, it is clear from the current literature that hepatic TAE is an effective and safer option to operative management in treating arterial hemorrhage in the setting of traumatic hepatic injury.

Intra-Abdominal Hemorrhage Control: The Need for Routine Four-Quadrant Packing Explored

BACKGROUND

Routine four-quadrant packing (4QP) for hemorrhage control immediately upon opening is a standard practice for acute trauma laparotomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of 4QP for bleeding control in acutely injured patients undergoing trauma laparotomy.

METHODS

Retrospective single-center study (01/2015-07/2019), including adult patients who underwent trauma laparotomy within 4 h of admission. Only patients with active intra-abdominal hemorrhage, defined as bleeding within the peritoneal cavity or expanding retroperitoneal hematoma, were considered for analysis. Bleeding sources were categorized anatomically: liver/retrohepatic inferior vena cava (RIVC), spleen, retroperitoneal zones 1, 2 and 3, mesentery and others. Hemorrhage was further categorized as originating from a single bleeding site (SBS) or from multiple bleeding sites (MBS). The effectiveness of directed versus 4QP was evaluated for bleeding from the liver/RIVC, spleen and retroperitoneal zone 3, areas that are potentially compressible. Directed packing was defined as indicated if the bleeding was restricted to one of the anatomic sites suitable for packing, 4QP was defined as indicated if ≥ 2 of the anatomic sites suitable for packing were bleeding.

RESULTS

During the study time frame, 924 patients underwent trauma laparotomy, of which 148 (16%) had active intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Of these, 47% had a SBS and 53% had MBS. The liver/RIVC was the most common bleeding source in both patients with SBS (42%) and in patients with MBS (54%). According to our predefined indications, 22 of 148 patients (15%) would have benefitted from initial 4QP, 90 of 148 patients (61%) from directed packing and 36 of 148 patients (24%) packing would not have been of any value.

CONCLUSION

Routine four-quadrant packing is frequently practiced. However, this is only required in a small proportion of patients undergoing trauma laparotomy. Directed packing can be equally effective, saves time and decreases the risk of iatrogenic injury from unnecessary packing.

Surgical treatment for severe liver injuries: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

The liver is one of the most frequently injured organs in abdominal trauma. The advancements in diagnosis and interventional therapy shifted the management of liver trauma towards a non-operative management (NOM). Nevertheless, in severe liver injuries (LI), surgical treatment often involving liver resection (LR) and rarely liver transplantation (LT) remains the main option. The present paper analyses a single center experience in a referral HPB center on a series of patients with high-grade liver trauma.

METHODS

Forty-five patients with severe LI, that benefitted from NOM (6 pts), LRs (38 pts), and LT (1 pt) performed in our center between June 2000 and June 2019, were included in a combined prospective and retrospective study. The median age of the patients was 29 years (median 33, range 10-76), and the male/female ratio of 33/12. Almost all cases had blunt trauma, except 2 with stab wound (4.4%).

RESULTS

LIs classified according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) system were 13.3% (grade III), 44.2% (grade IV), and 42.2% (grade V); none were grade I, II or VI. The rate of major LR was 56.4% (22 LRs). The median operative time was 200 minutes (mean 236; range 150-420). The median blood loss was 750 ml (mean 940; range 500-6500). Overall and major complication rates were 100% (45 pts) and 33.3% (15 pts), respectively. Overall mortality rate was 15.6% (7 pts).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe liver trauma, often involving complex liver resections, should be managed in a referral HPB center, thus obtaining the best results in terms of morbidity and mortality.

Early management of severe abdominal trauma

OBJECTIVE

To develop French guidelines on the management of patients with severe abdominal trauma.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 20 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine (Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation, SFAR), the French Society of Emergency Medicine (Société française de médecine d'urgence, SFMU), the French Society of Urology (Société française d'urologie, SFU) and from the French Association of Surgery (Association française de chirurgie, AFC), the Val-de-Grâce School (École du Val-De-Grâce, EVG) and the Federation for Interventional Radiology (Fédération de radiologie interventionnelle, FRI-SFR) was convened. Declaration of all conflicts of interest (COI) policy by all participants was mandatory throughout the development of the guidelines. The entire guideline process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for assessment of the available level of evidence with particular emphasis to avoid formulating strong recommendations in the absence of high level. Some recommendations were left ungraded.

METHODS

The guidelines are divided in diagnostic and, therapeutic strategy and early surveillance. All questions were formulated according to Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) format. The panel focused on three questions for diagnostic strategy: (1) What is the diagnostic performance of clinical signs to suggest abdominal injury in trauma patients? (2) Suspecting abdominal trauma, what is the diagnostic performance of prehospital FAST (Focused Abdominal Sonography for Trauma) to rule in abdominal injury and guide the prehospital triage of the patient? and (3) When suspecting abdominal trauma, does carrying out a contrast enhanced thoraco-abdominal CT scan allow identification of abdominal injuries and reduction of mortality? Four questions dealt with therapeutic strategy: (1) After severe abdominal trauma, does immediate laparotomy reduce morbidity and mortality? (2) Does a "damage control surgery" strategy decrease morbidity and mortality in patients with a severe abdominal trauma? (3) Does a laparoscopic approach in patients with abdominal trauma decrease mortality or morbidity? and (4) Does non-operative management of patients with abdominal trauma without bleeding reduce mortality and morbidity? Finally, one question was formulated regarding the early monitoring of these patients: In case of severe abdominal trauma, which kind of initial monitoring does allow to reduce the morbi-mortality? The analysis of the literature and the recommendations were conducted following the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The SFAR/SFMU Guideline panel provided 15 statements on early management of severe abdominal trauma. After three rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 100% of recommendations. Of these recommendations, five have a high level of evidence (Grade 1±), six have a low level of evidence (Grade 2±) and four are expert judgments. Finally, no recommendation was provided for one question.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best early management of severe abdominal trauma.

Splenic artery embolisation in trauma: A five-year single-centre experience at a UK major trauma centre

Introduction

Since the introduction of major trauma centres and regional trauma networks in 2012, management of splenic injury has shifted, with non-operative management now favoured. For those requiring intervention, splenic artery embolisation is well established as a first-line treatment in all but the most severely injured. Follow-up is variable, with few guidelines, highlighting the paucity of data addressing the need for further imaging and antimicrobial prophylaxis. This review was undertaken to assess practice and outcomes at our centre in the context of the contemporary literature.

Methods

This retrospective study captured splenic embolisations over five years (January 2012–December 2016). CRIS interventional radiology codes were used to retrieve embolisation cases and Trauma Audit and Research Network and hospital event statistics data were used to identify all cases of traumatic splenic injury and to identify splenectomy and non-operative management patients. Outcomes were compared with available standards from different sources.

Results

Over the study period 176 splenic injuries were identified, of which 122 underwent non-operative management, 28 were laparotomy first, and 26 undergoing embolisation with an increased trend to an ‘embolisation-first’ approach over this time. In the embolisation group, the age range was 16–79 yr (mean 41), 18 were male and the median time to intervention was 2 h 9 min (range 1.1–171 h), with eight following failed non-operative management. The proportion of proximal versus selective embolisation versus both was 10:14:1 and the predominant mechanism was coiling. One patient was not embolised due to absence of contrast extravasation on initial angiogram and two proceeded to splenectomy due to failure of splenic artery embolisation. There were complications in six patients: five ongoing left upper quadrant pain, one infected haematoma requiring drainage, two chest infections with pleural effusions, one of which required drainage. There were two deaths from other injuries. Fifteen of the 25 patients who underwent splenic artery embolisation had follow-up imaging, seven did not and three were excluded due to splenectomy and/or death; five patients were vaccinated according to the hospital splenectomy protocol, and six received prophylactic antibiotics.

Conclusion

Our data show that non-operative management is the mainstay of treatment for the majority of splenic injury patients. Serious complications are not common but variation does exist in follow-up. The changing management trends are in line with national data. These findings will help to further implement and develop local protocols but more work is required to address splenic function after embolisation and the requirement for antimicrobial prophylaxis.

Liver Transplantation Following Life-threatening Abdominal Trauma: A Case Series of 5 Patients at a Single Institution

Managing traumatic liver injury (TLI) is always challenging and demands precise clinical judgment. Currently, treatment of TLI in most circumstances is non-operative; however, surgical therapy might be required for severe TLI, particularly those that result in extensive blood loss. In the current institutional study carried out from June 1995 to April 2017, we describe our experience with 5 patients who received an orthotopic liver transplant for severe TLI. One patient passed away postoperatively from cerebral edema; 1 patient died of renal failure 4 years after the liver transplantation, and 3 patients are still alive. Based on our experience, we conclude that in patients with TLI, especially those with uncontrollable bleeding or those who develop liver failure, liver transplantation should be taken into consideration.

Selective non-operative management for penetrating splenic trauma: a systematic review

Introduction

The treatment of abdominal solid organ injuries has shifted towards non-operative management (NOM). However, the feasibility of NOM for penetrating splenic trauma is unclear and outcome is believed to be worse than NOM for penetrating liver and kidney injuries. Hence, the aim of the current systematic review was to evaluate the feasibility of selective NOM in penetrating splenic injury.

Methods

A review of literature was performed using Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Studies on adult patients treated by NOM for splenic injuries were included and outcome was documented and compared.

Results

Five articles from exclusively level-1 and level-2-traumacenters were selected and a total of 608 cases of penetrating splenic injury were included. Nonoperative management was applied in 123 patients (20.4%, range 17–33%). An overall failure rate of NOM of 18% was calculated. Mortality was not seen in patients selected for nonoperative management. Contra-indicatons for NOM included hemodynamic instability, absence of abdominal CT-scanning to rule out concurrent injuries and peritonitis.

Conclusions

This review demonstrates that non-operative management for penetrating splenic trauma in highly selected patients has been utilized in several well-equipped and experienced trauma centers. NOM of penetrating splenic injury in selected patients is not associated with increased morbidity nor mortality. Data on the less well-equipped and experienced trauma centers are not available. More prospective studies are required to further define exact selection criteria for non-operative management in splenic trauma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00068-019-01117-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Nonoperative management of solid abdominal organ injuries: From past to present

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Today, a significant proportion of solid abdominal organ injuries, whether caused by penetrating or blunt trauma, are managed nonoperatively. However, the controversy over operative versus nonoperative management started more than a hundred years ago. The aim of this review is to highlight some of the key past observations and summarize the current knowledge and guidelines in the management of solid abdominal organ injuries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A non-systematic search through historical articles and references on the management practices of abdominal injuries was conducted utilizing early printed volumes of major surgical and medical journals from the late 19th century onwards.

RESULTS

Until the late 19th century, the standard treatment of penetrating abdominal injuries was nonoperative. The first article advocating formal laparotomy for abdominal gunshot wounds was published in 1881 by Sims. After World War I, the policy of mandatory laparotomy became standard practice for penetrating abdominal trauma. During the latter half of the 20th century, the concept of selective nonoperative management, initially for anterior abdominal stab wounds and later also gunshot wounds, was adopted by major trauma centers in South Africa, the United States, and little later in Europe. In blunt solid abdominal organ injuries, the evolution from surgery to nonoperative management in hemodynamically stable patients aided by the development of modern imaging techniques was rapid from 1980s onwards.

CONCLUSION

With the help of modern imaging techniques and adjunctive radiological and endoscopic interventions, a major shift from mandatory to selective surgical approach to solid abdominal organ injuries has occurred during the last 30-50 years.

Variability in management of blunt liver trauma and contribution of level of American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma verification status on mortality

BACKGROUND

Patients who sustain blunt liver trauma and are treated at an American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma-verified Level I trauma center have an overall lower risk of mortality compared with patients admitted to a level II trauma center. However, elements contributing to these differences are unknown. We hypothesize that practice variation exists between trauma centers in management of blunt liver injury. Our objective is to identify practice variations and their effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data from a statewide collaborative quality initiative for trauma were used. The data set contains information from 29 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma verified Levels I and II trauma centers from 2011 to 2016. Propensity score matching was used to create cohorts of patients treated at Levels I or II trauma centers. The 1:1 matched cohorts were used to compare in-hospital mortality, management strategy, complications, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, and failure to rescue.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-four patients with grade 3 or higher blunt liver injury were included. Patients treated at level II trauma centers had higher in-hospital mortality than those treated at Level I trauma centers (15.4% vs 8.8%, p = 0.03). Level II trauma centers used angiography less compared with Level I centers (p = 0.007) and admitted significantly fewer patients to the ICU (p = 0.002). The ICU status was associated with reduced mortality (7.2% vs 23.9%, p < 0.001). Despite a lower rate of overall complications, Level II trauma centers were more likely to fail in rescuing their patients (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Admission with a high-grade liver injury to a Level II trauma center is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Level II trauma centers were less likely to use angiography or admit high-grade liver injuries to the ICU. This variation in practice may lead to the inability to rescue critically ill patients. Future research should investigate contributors to underutilization of resources for patients with high-grade liver injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Care management, level IV.

Stereological Comparison of Imbibed Fibrinogen Gauze versus Simple Gauze in External Packing of Grade IV Liver Injury in Rats

Objective

To evaluate the effect of imbibed fibrinogen gauze on survival, bleeding and healing in liver trauma.

Methods

This animal experimental study was conducted on 20 adult male Sprague-Dawley rats; with a mean weight of 300±50 gram; divided into two groups. Grade IV injury was induced to the subjects' liver. Then, the bleeding site was packed with simple gauze in the control group, and imbibed fibrinogen gauze in the experimental group. All animals were re-evaluated for liver hemostasis 48 hours after the initial injury. Bleeding in the intra peritoneal cavity was measured using Tuberculosis Syringe in the first and second operations. Subjects were followed-up for 14 days. Eventually, the rats were sacrificed and their livers were sent to a lab for stereological assessment. Statistical comparisons were performed via Mann-Whitney U-test using SPSS. P-Values less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Half of the rats in the control group died, while all the rats in the imbibed fibrinogen gauze group survived after two weeks (p= 0.032). Bleeding in the imbibed fibrinogen gauze was significantly less than control group, 48 hours' post-surgery (p<0.001). According to the stereological results, granulation tissue in the imbibed fibrinogen gauze group were more than the control group (P= 0.032). Also, fibrosis in the imbibed fibrinogen gauze group were more than the control group (P= 0.014).

Conclusion

Our study indicated that imbibed fibrinogen gauze can potentially control liver bleeding and improve survival through increasing granulation tissue and fibrosis in injured liver.

Safety of selective nonoperative management for blunt splenic trauma: the impact of concomitant injuries

Background

Nonoperative management for blunt splenic injury is the preferred treatment. To improve the outcome of selective nonoperative therapy, the current challenge is to identify factors that predict failure. Little is known about the impact of concomitant injury on outcome. Our study has two goals. First, to determine whether concomitant injury affects the safety of selective nonoperative treatment. Secondly we aimed to identify factors that can predict failure.

Methods

From our prospective trauma registry we selected all nonoperatively treated adult patients with blunt splenic trauma admitted between 01.01.2000 and 12.21.2013. All concurrent injuries with an AIS ≥ 2 were scored. We grouped and compared patients sustaining solitary splenic injuries and patients with concomitant injuries. To identify specific factors that predict failure we used a multivariable regression analysis.

Results

A total of 79 patients were included. Failure of nonoperative therapy (n = 11) and complications only occurred in patients sustaining concomitant injury. Furthermore, ICU-stay as well as hospitalization time were significantly prolonged in the presence of associated injury (4 versus 13 days,p < 0.05). Mortality was not seen. Multivariable analysis revealed the presence of a femur fracture and higher age as predictors of failure.

Conclusions

Nonoperative management for hemodynamically normal patients with blunt splenic injury is feasible and safe, even in the presence of concurrent (non-hollow organ) injuries or a contrast blush on CT. However, associated injuries are related to prolonged intensive care unit- and hospital stay, complications, and failure of nonoperative management. Specifically, higher age and the presence of a femur fracture are predictors of failure.

Splenic trauma in the twenty-first century: changing trends in management

Over the past three decades, management of blunt splenic trauma has changed radically. Use of improved diagnostic techniques and proper understanding of disease pathology has led to nonoperative management being chosen as the standard of care in patients who are haemodynamically stable. This review was undertaken to assess available literature regarding changing trends of management of blunt splenic trauma, and to identify the existing lacunae in nonoperative management. The PubMed database was searched for studies published between January 1987 and August 2017, using the keywords 'blunt splenic trauma' and 'nonoperative management'. One hundred and fifty-three articles were reviewed, of which 82 free full texts and free abstracts were used in the current review. There is clear evidence in published literature of the greater success of nonoperative over operative management in patients who are haemodynamically stable and the increasing utility of adjunctive therapies like angiography with embolisation. However, the review revealed a lack of universal guidelines for patient selection criteria and diagnostic and grading procedures needed for nonoperative management. Indications for splenic artery embolisation, the current role of splenectomy and spleen-preserving surgeries, together with the place of minimal access surgery in blunt splenic trauma remain grey areas. Moreover, parameters affecting the outcomes of nonoperative management and its failure and management need to be defined. This shows a need for future studies focused on these shortcomings with the ultimate aim being the formulation and implementation of universally accepted guidelines for safe and efficient management of blunt splenic trauma.

The Forensic Pathology of Liver Trauma

The forensic pathologist is an integral part of the trauma surgery team. Trauma surgeons depend on autopsy descriptions for accurate measurement of the severity of trauma and determination of the chance of mortality. The outcome of liver injury improved greatly during the 20th century, primarily due to improved diagnostic and management techniques. In many trauma cases, survival depends on injuries to areas other than the liver. Measurement of the severity of liver trauma often uses the TRISS (Trauma and Injury Severity Score) method, which depends on the nature, location, and size of injuries. Injuries produced by blunt trauma depend on the direction of the force and its interaction with the anatomic structures that surround the liver. Sharp force and gunshot injuries depend on the portions of the liver involved and the amount of kinetic energy transmitted to the tissue. The liver is susceptible to injury from resuscitation, although these injuries are usually not severe. Acad Forensic Pathol. 2018 8(2): 184-191.

Emergency CT for assessment and management of blunt traumatic splenic injuries at a Level 1 Trauma Center: 13-year study

PURPOSE

To determine the relationship between multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) findings, management strategies, and ultimate clinical outcomes in patients with splenic injuries secondary to blunt trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This Institutional Review Board-approved study collected 351 consecutive patients admitted at the Emergency Department (ED) of a Level I Trauma Center with blunt splenic trauma between October 2002 and November 2015. Their MDCT studies were retrospectively and independently reviewed by two radiologists to grade splenic injuries according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) organ injury scale (OIS) and to detect intraparenchymal (type A) or extraparenchymal (type B) active bleeding and/or contained vascular injuries (CVI). Clinical data, information on management, and outcome were retrieved from the hospital database. Statistical analysis relied on Student's t, chi-squared, and Cohen's kappa tests.

RESULTS

Emergency multiphase MDCT was obtained in 263 hemodynamically stable patients. Interobserver agreement for both AAST grading of injuries and vascular lesions was excellent (k = 0.77). Operative management (OM) was performed in 160 patients (45.58% of the whole cohort), and high-grade (IV and V) OIS injuries and type B bleeding were statistically significant (p < 0.05) predictors of OM. Nonoperative management (NOM) failed in 23 patients out of 191 (12.04%). In 75% of them, NOM failure occurred within 30 h from the trauma event, without significant increase of mortality. Both intraparenchymal and extraparenchymal active bleeding were predictive of NOM failure (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Providing detection and characterization of parenchymal and vascular traumatic lesions, MDCT plays a crucial role for safe and appropriate guidance of ED management of splenic traumas and contributes to the shift toward NOM in hemodynamically stable patients.

A cohort study to evaluate infection prevention protocol in pediatric trauma patients with blunt splenic injury in a Dutch level 1 trauma center

PURPOSE

Asplenic patients are at increased risk for the development of overwhelming postsplenectomy infection (OPSI) syndrome. It is believed that adequate immunization, antimicrobial prophylaxis, as well as appropriate education concerning risks on severe infection lead to the decreased incidence of OPSI. The aim of this study was to analyze the methods used to prevent OPSI in trauma patients splenectomized before the age of 18.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective, single-center study of all pediatric patients sustaining blunt splenic injury (BSI) managed at our level 1 trauma center from January 1979 to March 2012 was performed. A questionnaire was sent to all the included patients to determine the level of knowledge concerning infection risks, the use of antibiotics, and compliance to vaccination recommendations. Furthermore, we investigated whether the implementation of guidelines in 2003 and 2011 resulted in higher vaccination rates.

RESULTS

We included 116 children with BSI. A total of 93 completed interviews were eligible for analysis, resulting in a total response rate of 80% and 1,116 patient years. Twenty-seven patients were splenectomized, and 66 patients were treated by a spleen preserving therapy (including embolization). Only two out of 27 splenectomized patients were adequately vaccinated, five patients without a spleen used prophylactic antibiotics, and about half of the asplenic patients had adequate knowledge of the risk that asplenia entails. A total of 22/27 splenectomized patients were neither adequately vaccinated nor received prophylactic antibiotics. There was no OPSI seen in our study population during the 1,116 follow-up years.

CONCLUSION

The vaccination status, the level of knowledge concerning prevention of an OPSI, and the use of prophylactic antibiotics are suboptimal in pediatric patients treated for BSI. Therefore, we created a new follow-up treatment guideline to have adequate preventive coverage to current standards for these patients.

Abdominal Trauma Revisited

Although abdominal trauma has been described since antiquity, formal laparotomies for trauma were not performed until the 1800s. Even with the introduction of general anesthesia in the United States during the years 1842 to 1846, laparotomies for abdominal trauma were not performed during the Civil War. The first laparotomy for an abdominal gunshot wound in the United States was finally performed in New York City in 1884. An aggressive operative approach to all forms of abdominal trauma till the establishment of formal trauma centers (where data were analyzed) resulted in extraordinarily high rates of nontherapeutic laparotomies from the 1880s to the 1960s. More selective operative approaches to patients with abdominal stab wounds (1960s), blunt trauma (1970s), and gunshot wounds (1990s) were then developed. Current adjuncts to the diagnosis of abdominal trauma when serial physical examinations are unreliable include the following: 1) diagnostic peritoneal tap/lavage, 2) surgeon-performed ultrasound examination; 3) contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis; and 4) diagnostic laparoscopy. Operative techniques for injuries to the liver, spleen, duodenum, and pancreas have been refined considerably since World War II. These need to be emphasized repeatedly in an era when fewer patients undergo laparotomy for abdominal trauma. Finally, abdominal trauma damage control is a valuable operative approach in patients with physiologic exhaustion and multiple injuries.

Surgical Management of Solid Organ Injuries

Surgery used to be the treatment of choice in patients with solid organ injuries. This has changed over the past 2 decades secondary to advances in noninvasive diagnostic techniques, increased availability of less invasive procedures, and a better understanding of the natural history of solid organ injuries. Now, nonoperative management (NOM) has become the initial management strategy used for most solid organ injuries. Even though NOM has become the standard of care in patients with solid organ injuries in most trauma centers, surgeons should not hesitate to operate on a patient to control life-threatening hemorrhage.

Recent trends in 30-day mortality in patients with blunt splenic injury: A nationwide trauma database study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Splenic injury frequently occurs after blunt abdominal trauma; however, limited epidemiological data regarding mortality are available. We aimed to investigate mortality rate trends after blunt splenic injury in Japan.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 1,721 adults with blunt splenic injury (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma splenic injury scale grades III-V) from the 2004-2014 Japan Trauma Data Bank. We grouped the records of these patients into 3 time phases: phase I (2004-2008), phase II (2009-2012), and phase III (2013-2014). Over the 3 phases, we analysed 30-day mortality rates and investigated their association with the prevalence of certain initial interventions (Mantel-Haenszel trend test). We further performed multiple imputation and multivariable analyses for comparing the characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent TAE or splenectomy/splenorrhaphy, adjusting for known potential confounders and for within-hospital clustering using generalised estimating equation.

RESULTS

Over time, there was a significant decrease in 30-day mortality after splenic injury (p < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis revealed that mortality significantly decreased over time (from phase I to phase II, odds ratio: 0.39, 95% confidence interval: 0.22-0.67; from phase I to phase III, odds ratio: 0.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.62) for the overall cohort. While the 30-day mortality for splenectomy/splenorrhaphy diminished significantly over time (p = 0.01), there were no significant differences regarding mortality for non-operative management, with or without transcatheter arterial embolisation (p = 0.43, p = 0.29, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In Japan, in-hospital 30-day mortality rates decreased significantly after splenic injury between 2004 and 2014, even after adjustment for within-hospital clustering and other factors independently associated with mortality. Over time, mortality rates decreased significantly after splenectomy/splenorrhaphy, but not after non-operative management. This information is useful for clinicians when making decisions about treatments for patients with blunt splenic injury.

Non-operative management for penetrating splenic trauma: how far can we go to save splenic function?

BACKGROUND

Selective non-operative management (NOM) for the treatment of blunt splenic trauma is safe. Currently, the feasibility of selective NOM for penetrating splenic injury (PSI) is unclear. Unfortunately, little is known about the success rate of spleen-preserving surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of selective NOM for penetrating splenic injuries.

METHODS

A dual-centre study is performed in two level-one trauma centres. All identified patients treated for PSI were identified. Patients were grouped based on the treatment they received. Group one consisted of splenectomised patients, the second group included patients treated by a spleen-preserving surgical intervention, and group three included those patients who were treated by NOM.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients with a median age of 27 and a median ISS of 25 (interquartile range (IQR) 16-34) were included. Ninety-six patients required operative intervention, of whom 45 underwent a total splenectomy and 51 underwent spleen-preserving surgical procedures. Furthermore, 22 patients (12 stab wounds and 10 gunshot wounds) were treated by NOM. There were several anticipated significant differences in the baseline encountered. The median hospitalization time was 8 (5-12) days, with no significant differences between the groups. The splenectomy group had significantly more intensive care unit (ICU) days (2(0-6) vs. 0(0-1)) and ventilation days (1(0-3) vs. 0(0-0)) compared to the NOM group. Mortality was only noted in the splenectomy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Spleen-preserving surgical therapy for PSI is a feasible treatment modality and is not associated with increased mortality. Moreover, a select group of patients can be treated without any surgical intervention at all.

Clinical and Radiological Presentations and Management of Blunt Splenic Trauma: A Single Tertiary Hospital Experience

BACKGROUND Splenic injury is the leading cause of major bleeding after blunt abdominal trauma. We examined the clinical and radiological presentations, management, and outcome of blunt splenic injuries (BSI) in our institution. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective study of BSI patients between 2011 and 2014 was conducted. We analyzed and compared management and outcome of different splenic injury grades in trauma patients. RESULTS A total of 191 BSI patients were identified with a mean (SD) age of 26.9 years (13.1); 164 (85.9%) were males. Traffic-related accident was the main mechanism of injury. Splenic contusion and hematoma (77.2%) was the most frequent finding on initial computerized tomography (CT) scans, followed by shattered spleen (11.1%), blush (11.1%), and devascularization (0.6%). Repeated CT scan revealed 3 patients with pseudoaneurysm who underwent angioembolization. Nearly a quarter of patients were managed surgically. Non-operative management failed in 1 patient who underwent splenectomy. Patients with grade V injury presented with higher mean ISS and abdominal AIS, required frequent blood transfusion, and were more likely to be FAST-positive (p=0.001). The majority of low-grade (I-III) splenic injuries were treated conservatively, while patients with high-grade (IV and V) BSI frequently required splenectomy (p=0.001). Adults were more likely to have grade I, II, and V BSI, blood transfusion, and prolonged ICU stay as compared to pediatric BSI patients. The overall mortality rate was 7.9%, which is mainly association with traumatic brain injury and hemorrhagic shock; half of the deaths occurred within the first day after injury. CONCLUSIONS Most BSI patients had grade I-III injuries that were successfully treated non-operatively, with a low failure rate. The severity of injury and presence of associated lesions should be carefully considered in developing the management plan. Thorough clinical assessment and CT scan evaluation are crucial for appropriate management of BSI.

Management of Liver Trauma

In the last 30 years, the management of liver injury has evolved significantly. The advancement of imaging studies has played an important role in the conservative approach for management. A shift from operative to nonoperative management for most hemodynamically stable patients with hepatic injury has been prompted by speed and sensitivity of diagnostic imaging and by advances in critical care monitoring. In this review article, the up-to-date recommendation on the management approach of liver trauma will be discussed.

Current approach to liver traumas

INTRODUCTION

Liver injuries remain major obstacle for successful treatment, due to size and location of the liver. Requirement for surgery should be determined by clinical factors, most notably hemodynamical state. In this present study we tried to declare our approach to liver traumas. We also tried to emphasize the importance of conservative treatment, since surgeries for liver traumas carry high mortality rates.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

Patients admitted to the Department of Emergency Surgery at Kartal Research and Education Hospital, due to liver trauma were retrospectively analyzed between 2003 and 2013. Patient demographics, hepatic panel, APTT (activated partial thromboplastin time), PT (prothrombin time), INR (international normalized ratio), fibrinogen, biochemistry panel were recorded. Hemodynamic instability was the most prominent factor for surgery decision, in the lead of current Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) protocols. Operation records and imaging modalities revealed liver injuries according to the Organ Injury Scale of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma. 300 patients admitted to emergency department were included in our study (187 males and 113 females). Mean age was 47 years (range, 12-87). The overall mortality rate was 13% (40 out of 300). Major factor responsible for mortality rates and outcome was stability of cases on admission. 188 (% 63) patients were counted as stable, whereas 112 (% 37) cases were found unstable (blood pressure ≤ 90, after massive resuscitation). 192 patients were observed conservatively, whereas 108 cases received abdominal surgery. High levels of AST, ALT, LDH, INR, creatinine and low levels of fibrinogen and low platelet counts on admission were found to be associated with mortality and these cases also had Grade 4 and 5 injuries. Hemodynamic instability on admission and the type and grade of injury played major role in mortality rates). Packing was performed in 35 patients, with Grade 4 and 5 injuries. Mortality rate was %13 (40 out of 300).

CONCLUSION

A multidisciplinary approach to the management of hepatic injuries has evolved over the last few decades, but the basic principles of trauma continue to be observed. Diagnostic and therapeutic endeavors are chosen based mainly on the stability of the patient. Stable patients with reliable examinations and available resources can be managed nonoperatively. Unstable patients require surgery. Our current approach to liver traumas is non operative technique, if possible.

Evidence-Based Management and Controversies in Blunt Splenic Trauma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The study aims to describe the evidence-based management and controversies in blunt splenic trauma.

RECENT FINDINGS

A shift from operative management to non-operative management (NOM) has occurred over the past decades where NOM has now become the standard of care in haemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury. Splenic artery embolisation (SAE) is generally believed to increase the success rate of NOM. Not all the available evidence is that optimistic about SAE however. A morbidity specifically related to SAE of up to 47% has been reported. Although high-grade splenic injury is a prognostic factor for failure of NOM, an American research group has published a study in which NOM is performed in over half of haemodynamically stable patients with grade IV or V splenic injury without leading to an increased morbidity (in terms of complications) or mortality. Another area of current investigation in the literature is the exact indication for SAE. Although the generally accepted indication is the presence of vascular injury, a topic of current investigation is whether there might be a role for pre-emptive embolisation in patients with high-grade splenic injury. On the other hand, evidence is also emerging that not all blushes require an intervention (small blushes <1 or 1.5 cm do not). Lastly, the available evidence shows that splenic function is preserved after embolisation, and therefore, the routine administration of vaccinations seems not to be necessary. There might be a difference between proximal and distal embolisations; however, with regard to splenic function, in favour of distal embolisation.

SUMMARY

Nowadays, NOM is the standard of care in haemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury. The available evidence (although with a relatively small number of patients) shows that splenic function is preserved after NOM, a major advantage compared to splenectomy. SAE is used as an adjunct to observation in order to increase the success rate of NOM. Operative management should be applied in case of haemodynamic instability or if associated intra-abdominal injuries requiring surgical treatment are present. Patient selection (which patient can be safely treated non-operatively, does every blush needs to be embolised?, which patients might be better off with direct operative intervention given the patient and injury characteristics) is an ongoing subject of further research. Future studies should also focus on long-term outcomes of patients treated with embolisation (e.g. total number of lifetime infectious episodes requiring antibiotic treatment or hospital admission, quality of life).

Surgical intervention for paediatric liver injuries is almost history - a 12-year cohort from a major Scandinavian trauma centre

Background

Although nonoperative management (NOM) has become standard care, optimal treatment of liver injuries in children is still challenging since many of these patients have multiple injuries. Moreover, the role of angiography remains poorly defined, and a high index of suspicion of complications is warranted. This study reviews treatment and outcomes in children with liver injuries at a major Scandinavian trauma centre over a 12-year period.

Methods

Patients <17 years old with liver injury admitted to Oslo University Hospital Ullevaal during the period 2002-2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Data were compiled from the institutional trauma registry and medical records.

Results

A total of 66 children were included. The majority was severely injured as reflected by a median injury severity score of 20.5 (mean 22.2). NOM was attempted in 60 (90.9%) patients and was successful in 57, resulting in a NOM success rate of 95.0% [95% CI 89.3 to 100]. Only one of the three NOM failures was liver related, occurred in the early part of the study period, and consisted in operative placement of drains for bile leak. Two (3.0%) patients underwent angiographic embolization (AE). Complications occurred in 18 (27.3% [95 % CI 16.2 to 38.3]) patients. Only 2 (3.0%) patients had liver related complications, in both cases bile leak. Six (9.1%) patients underwent therapeutic laparotomy for non-liver related injuries. Two (3.0%) patients died secondary to traumatic brain injury.

Discussion

This single institution paediatric liver injury cohort confirms high attempted NOM and NOM success rates even in patients with high grade injuries and multiple accompanying injuries. AE can be a useful NOM adjunct in the treatment of paediatric liver injuries, but is seldom indicated. Moreover, bile leak is the most common liver-related complication and the need for liver-related surgery is very infrequent.

Conclusion

NOM is the treatment of choice in almost all liver injuries in children, with operative management and interventional radiology very infrequently indicated.

Blunt Splenic Trauma

The treatment of blunt splenic injury has evolved over time from splenectomy in all patients to nonoperative management in stable patients with operation reserved for failures of NOM. While rates of OPSI remain low in trauma patients, splenic salvage in stable patients should be attempted. However, clinical evidence of ongoing blood loss or instability should be addressed with prompt splenectomy. Careful patient selection is of paramount importance in nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury.

The role of computed tomographic scan in ongoing triage of operative hepatic trauma: A Western Trauma Association multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

A subset of patients explored for abdominal injury have persistent hepatic bleeding on postoperative computed tomography (CT) and/or angiography, either not identified or not manageable at initial laparotomy. To identify patients at risk for ongoing hemorrhage and guide triage to angiography, we investigated the relationship of early postoperative CT scan with outcomes in operative hepatic trauma.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 528 patients with hepatic injury taken to laparotomy without imaging within 6 hours of arrival to six trauma centers from 2007 to 2013, coordinated through the Western Trauma Association multicenter trials group.

RESULTS

A total of 528 patients were identified, with a mean age of 31 years, 82% male, and 37% blunt injury; mean (SD) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 27 (16) and base deficit was -9 (6); in-hospital mortality was 26%. Seventy-three patients died during initial exploration. Of 455 early survivors, 123 (27%) had a postoperative contrast CT scan within 24 hours of laparotomy. CT patients had more common blunt injury, higher ISS, and lower base deficit than those who did not undergo CT. CT identified hepatic contrast extravasation or pseudoaneurysm in 10 patients (8%). Hepatic bleeding on CT was 83% sensitive and 75% specific (likelihood ratio, 3.3) for later positive angiography; negative CT finding was 96% sensitive and 83% specific (likelihood ratio, 5.7) for later negative or not performed angiography. Despite occurring in a more severely injured cohort, performance of early postoperative CT was associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.16) in multivariate analysis. Blunt mechanism was also a multivariate predictor of mortality (odds ratio, 3.0).

CONCLUSION

Early postoperative CT scan after laparotomy for hepatic trauma identifies clinically relevant ongoing bleeding and is sufficiently sensitive and specific to guide triage to angiography. Contrast CT should be considered in the management algorithm for hepatic trauma, particularly in the setting of blunt injury. Further study should identify optimal patient selection criteria and CT scan timing in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Care management/therapeutic study, level IV; epidemiologic/prognostic study, level III.

Paintball-related traumatic liver injury

Paintball is a popular recreational sport played at both amateur and professional level. Ocular injuries are well recognised, although there is a growing body of literature documenting superficial vascular as well as deep solid organ injuries. An 18-year-old man presented with signs and symptoms consistent with acute appendicitis. Intraoperatively, a grade III liver injury was identified and packed before a relook at 48 h. No further active bleeding was identified; however, follow-up ultrasound at 3 weeks demonstrated non-resolution of a large subcapsular haematoma. The patient was readmitted for a short period of observation and discharged with repeat ultrasound scheduled for 3 months. This represents the first report of paintball-related blunt traumatic injury to the liver. Solid organ injuries of this nature have only been reported three times previously-all in the urological setting. This case also highlights issues surrounding the use of routine follow-up imaging in blunt liver trauma and provides a concise discussion of the relevant literature.

Blunt splenic trauma: Assessment, management and outcomes

BACKGROUND

The approach for diagnosis and management of blunt splenic injury (BSI) has been considerably shifted towards non-operative management (NOM). We aimed to review the current practice for the evaluation, diagnosis and management of BSI.

METHODS

A traditional narrative literature review was carried out using PubMed, MEDLINE and Google scholar search engines. We used the keywords "Traumatic Splenic injury", "Blunt splenic trauma", "management" between December 1954 and November 2014.

RESULTS

Most of the current guidelines support the NOM or minimally approaches in hemodynamically stable patients. Improvement in the diagnostic modalities guide the surgeons to decide the timely management pathway Though, there is an increasing shift from operative management (OM) to NOM of BSI; NOM of high grade injury is associated with a greater rate of failure, prolonged hospital stay, risk of delayed hemorrhage and transfusion-associated infections. Some cases with high grade BSI could be successfully treated conservatively, if clinically feasible, while some patients with lower grade injury might end-up with delayed splenic rupture. Therefore, the selection of treatment modalities for BSI should be governed by patient clinical presentation, surgeon's experience in addition to radiographic findings.

CONCLUSION

About one-fourth of the blunt abdominal trauma accounted for BSI. A high index of clinical suspicion along with radiological diagnosis helps to identify and characterize splenic injuries with high accuracy and is useful for timely decision-making to choose between OM or NOM. Careful selection of NOM is associated with high success rate with a lower rate of morbidity and mortality.

Liver trauma: WSES position paper

The liver is the most injured organ in abdominal trauma. Road traffic crashes and antisocial, violent behavior account for the majority of liver injuries. The present position paper represents the position of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) about the management of liver injuries.

Non-operative management versus operative management in high-grade blunt hepatic injury

BACKGROUND

Surgery used to be the treatment of choice in cases of blunt hepatic injury, but this approach gradually changed over the last two decades as increasing non-operative management (NOM) of splenic injury led to its use for hepatic injury. The improvement in critical care monitoring and computed tomographic scanning, as well as the more frequent use of interventional radiology techniques, has helped to bring about this change to non-operative management. Liver trauma ranges from a small capsular tear, without parenchymal laceration, to massive parenchymal injury with major hepatic vein/retrohepatic vena cava lesions. In 1994, the Organ Injury Scaling Committee of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) revised the Hepatic Injury Scale to have a range from grade I to VI. Minor injuries (grade I or II) are the most frequent liver injuries (80% to 90% of all cases); severe injuries are grade III-V lesions; grade VI lesions are frequently incompatible with survival. In the medical literature, the majority of patients who have undergone NOM have low-grade liver injuries. The safety of NOM in high-grade liver lesions, AAST grade IV and V, remains a subject of debate as a high incidence of liver and collateral extra-abdominal complications are still described.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-operative management compared to operative management in high-grade (grade III-V) blunt hepatic injury.

SEARCH METHODS

The search for studies was run on 14 April 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic+Embase (Ovid), PubMed, ISI WOS (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S & CPSI-SSH), clinical trials registries, conference proceedings, and we screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials that compare non-operative management versus operative management in high-grade blunt hepatic injury.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently applied the selection criteria to relevant study reports. We used standard methodological procedures as defined by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We were unable to find any randomised controlled trials of non-operative management versus operative management in high-grade blunt hepatic injury.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In order to further explore the preliminary findings provided by animal models and observational clinical studies that suggests there may be a beneficial effect of non-operative management versus operative management in high-grade blunt hepatic injury, large, high quality randomised trials are needed.

Proximal Versus Distal Splenic Artery Embolisation for Blunt Splenic Trauma: What is the Impact on Splenic Immune Function?

PURPOSE

To compare the impact of proximal or distal splenic artery embolisation versus that of splenectomy on splenic immune function as measured by IgM memory B cell levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with splenic trauma who were treated by splenic artery embolisation (SAE) were enrolled. After 6 months splenic volume was assessed by CT, and IgM memory B cells in peripheral blood were measured and compared to a local normal reference population and to a post-splenectomy population.

RESULTS

Of the 71 patients who underwent embolisation, 38 underwent proximal embolisation, 11 underwent distal embolisation, 22 patients were excluded, 1 had both proximal and distal embolisation, 5 did not survive and 16 did not return for evaluation. There was a significant difference between splenectomy and proximal or distal embolisation and a trend towards greater preservation of IgM memory B cell number in those with distal embolisation-a difference that could not be attributed to differences in age, grade of injury or residual splenic volume.

CONCLUSION

IgM memory B cell levels are significantly higher in those treated with SAE compared to splenectomy. Our data provide evidence that splenic embolisation should reduce immunological complications of spleen trauma and suggest that distal embolisation may maintain better function.

Organ laceration grading adherence by radiologists

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) abdominopelvic organ laceration grading is used to determine which patients can be managed non-operatively. We assess a change in the use of AAST grading system by radiologists at a single, large, academic institution before and after a one-time departmental intervention and reviewed non-graded reports evaluating if grading could be inferred. After IRB approval, a keyword search for "laceration" identified traumatic abdominopelvic CT reports in a 2-year period before and after the one-time intervention. Reports were reviewed to determine if an organ laceration was seen, if it was graded by AAST criteria, and if grading could be inferred for non-graded reports. T test was performed to assess statistical significance. Before the intervention, 348 reports contained the keyword "laceration," 81 with lacerations, 31 graded (38 %). After the intervention, 302 reports were found, 79 with lacerations, 59 graded (75 %). The increase was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). A decreasing trend in grading was seen over time following the intervention. Two out of 50 (4 %) pre-intervention and four out of 20 (20 %) post-intervention reports gave enough detailed descriptions for the grading to be inferred when it was not explicitly stated. Non-graded reports did not describe laceration parenchymal depth and subcapsular hematoma surface area percentage; however, the presence/absence of active extravasation, omitted in the 20-year-old AAST grading scheme, was described in every report. One-time departmental intervention yielded a significant increase in adherence to AAST laceration grading. Lack of perfect compliance, which diminished over time, suggests a need for further reinforcement.

The contemporary management of penetrating splenic injury

INTRODUCTION

Selective non-operative management (NOM) is standard of care for clinically stable patients with blunt splenic trauma and expectant management approaches are increasingly utilised in penetrating abdominal trauma, including in the setting of solid organ injury. Despite this evolution of clinical practice, little is known about the safety and efficacy of NOM in penetrating splenic injury.

METHODS

Trauma registry and medical record review identified all consecutive patients presenting to LAC+USC Medical Center with penetrating splenic injury between January 2001 and December 2011. Associated injuries, incidence and nature of operative intervention, local and systemic complications and mortality were determined.

RESULTS

During the study period, 225 patients experienced penetrating splenic trauma. The majority (187/225, 83%) underwent emergent laparotomy. Thirty-eight clinically stable patients underwent a deliberate trial of NOM and 24/38 (63%) were ultimately managed without laparotomy. Amongst patients failing NOM, 3/14 (21%) underwent splenectomy while an additional 6/14 (42%) had splenorrhaphy. Hollow viscus injury (HVI) occurred in 21% of all patients failing NOM. Forty percent of all NOM patients had diaphragmatic injury (DI). All patients undergoing delayed laparotomy for HVI or a splenic procedure presented symptomatically within 24h of the initial injury. No deaths occurred in patients undergoing NOM.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the vast majority of penetrating splenic trauma requires urgent operative management, a group of patients does present without haemodynamic instability, peritonitis or radiologic evidence of hollow viscus injury. Management of these patients is complicated as over half may remain clinically stable and can avoid laparotomy, making them potential candidates for a trial of NOM. HVI is responsible for NOM failure in up to a fifth of these cases and typically presents within 24h of injury. Delayed laparotomy, within this limited time period, did not appear to increase mortality nor preclude successful splenic salvage. In clinically stable patients, diagnostic laparoscopy remains essential to evaluate and repair occult DI. As NOM for penetrating abdominal trauma becomes more common, multi-centre data is needed to more accurately define the principles of patient selection and the limitations and consequences of this approach in the setting of splenic injury.

Angiographic embolization in the treatment of intrahepatic arterial bleeding in patients with blunt abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Angiographic embolization (AE) as an adjunct non-operative treatment of intrahepatic arterial bleeding has been widely used. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of selective AE in patients with hepatic trauma.

METHODS

Seventy patients with intrahepatic arterial bleeding after blunt abdominal trauma who had undergone selective AE in 10 years at this institution were retrospectively reviewed. The criteria for selective AE included active extravasation on contrast-enhanced CT, an episode of hypotension or a decrease in hemoglobin level during the non-operative treatment. The data of the patients included demographics, grade of liver injuries, mechanism of blunt abdominal trauma, associated intra-abdominal injuries, indications for AE, angiographic findings, type of AE, and AE-related hepatobiliary complications.

RESULTS

In the 70 patients, 32 (45.71%) had high-grade liver injuries. Extravazation during the early arterial phase mainly involved the right hepatic segments. Thirteen (18.57%) patients underwent embolization of intrahepatic branches and the extrahepatic trunk and these patients all developed AE-related hepatobiliary complications. In 19 patients with AE-related complications, 14 received minimally invasive treatment and recovered without severe sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

AE is an adjunct treatment for liver injuries. Selective and/or super-selective AE should be advocated to decrease the incidence and severity of AE-related hepatobiliary complications.

Isolated abdominal trauma: diagnosis and clinical management considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The scope of the present study is to review the topics of initial assessment, diagnosis and clinical management of an isolated abdominal trauma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Progress in the management of trauma patients increasing survival includes a multidisciplinary approach involving multiple specialties at presentation. If immediate surgical intervention is needed, 'damage control' is the best option; if not, it has been proven that conservative management is superior to operative, in terms of survival for the majority of intraabdominal injury. 'Open abdomen' should be performed in major abdominal traumas when indicated. Early enteral feeding is beneficial, even in the presence of 'open abdomen'.

SUMMARY

Abdominal trauma is a complex injury; the multidisciplinary approach has made nonoperative management feasible and effective. When surgical intervention is needed, it should be performed in an orderly fashion, within the context of the overall management.

The swinging pendulum: a national perspective of nonoperative management in severe blunt liver injury

BACKGROUND

Despite a shift toward nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt liver trauma, severe injuries continue to require operative management. Our objective was to examine current trends of NOM for severe blunt liver injury from a national perspective.

METHODS

Patients with blunt liver injury with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of 4 or greater and no other major solid organ injury or pelvic fracture were identified in the National Trauma Data Bank 2002 to 2008. Attempted NOM was defined as no surgery in 6 hours or less. Failed NOM was defined as surgery in greater than 6 hours. Cox regression evaluated the association of NOM outcome with 30-day mortality after controlling for injury severity and center. Logistic regression was used to define independent predictors of failed NOM. Annual attempted and failed NOM rates were compared during the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 3,627 patients were identified with a median Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 29 (interquartile range, 20-38) and 20% mortality. Early operative management occurred in 20%, while initial NOM occurred in 73% of the patients. Of these, 93% had successful NOM, and 7% had failed NOM. Failed NOM was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.6; p = 0.01). Increasing age, male sex, increasing ISS, decreasing Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, hypotension, and hepatic angioembolization were independent predictors of failed NOM. The rate of attempted and failed NOM increased during the study period (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

NOM for isolated severe blunt liver injury is increasing nationally with similar increment in failure. Failed NOM was associated with higher mortality. Several predictors of failed NOM were identified including age, sex, ISS, GCS, and hypotension. These factors may allow for better patient selection and improved outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV; prognostic/epidemiologic study, level III.