Cost-effectiveness of splenic artery embolization versus splenectomy after trauma in the Netherlands

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

Background

Splenic 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 non-operative management (NOM) or surgery.

Study design

Trauma registries from two level I trauma centers from 2010 to 2020 were used to identify patients aged >18 years with grade III-V blunt splenic injuries. Results were compared with the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) for 2018 for level I and II centers. Additional intervention or failure was defined as any subsequent SAE or surgery. Mortality was defined as death during admission.

Results

There were 266 vs 5943 patients who met inclusion/exclusion criteria at Stanford/Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (SCVMC) versus the NTDB. Initial intervention differed significantly between cohorts with the use of SAE (6% vs 17%, p=0.000). Failure differed significantly between cohorts (1.5% vs 6.5%, p=0.005). On multivariate analysis, failure in NOM was significantly associated with NTDB cohort status, age 65+ years, more than one comorbidity, mechanism of injury, grade V spleen injury, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) 25+. On multivariate analysis, failure in SAE was significantly associated with Shock Index >0.9 and 10+ units blood in 24 hours. On multivariate analysis, a higher risk of mortality was significantly associated with NTDB cohort status, age 65+ years, no private insurance, more than one comorbidity, mechanism of injury, ISS 25+, 10+ units blood in 24 hours, NOM, more than one hospital complications, anticoagulant use, other Abbreviated Injury Scale ≥3 abdominal injuries.

Conclusions

Compared with national data, our cohort had less SAE, lower rates of additional intervention, and had lower risk-adjusted mortality. Shock Index >0.9, grade V splenic injuries, and increased transfusion requirements in the first 24 hours may signal a need for surgical intervention rather than SAE or NOM and may reduce mortality in appropriately selected patients.

Level of evidence

Level II/III.

Splenic artery embolisation for splenic injury during colonoscopy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Splenic injury due to colonoscopy is rare, but has high mortality. While historically treated conservatively for low-grade injuries or with splenectomy for high-grade injuries, splenic artery embolisation is increasingly utilised, reflecting modern treatment guidelines for external blunt trauma. This systematic review evaluates outcomes of published cases of splenic injury due to colonoscopy treated with splenic artery embolisation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of published articles concerning splenic injury during colonoscopy treated primarily with splenic artery embolisation, splenectomy, or splenorrhaphy from 1977 to 2022. Datapoints included demographics, past surgical history, indication for colonoscopy, delay to diagnosis, treatment, grade of injury, splenic artery embolisation location, splenic preservation (salvage), and mortality.

RESULTS

The 30 patients treated with splenic artery embolisation were of mean age 65 (SD 9) years and 67% female, with 83% avoiding splenectomy and 6.7% mortality. Splenic artery embolisation was proximal to the splenic hilum in 81%. The 163 patients treated with splenectomy were of mean age 65 (SD 11) years and 66% female, with 5.5% mortality. Three patients treated with splenorrhaphy of median age 60 (range 59-70) years all avoided splenectomy with no mortality. There was no difference in mortality between splenic artery embolisation and splenectomy cohorts (p = 0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Splenic artery embolisation is an effective treatment option in splenic injury due to colonoscopy. Given the known benefits of splenic salvage compared to splenectomy, including preserved immune function against encapsulated organisms, low cost, and shorter hospital length of stay, embolisation should be incorporated into treatment pathways for splenic injury due to colonoscopy in suitable patients.

Repeated partial splenic artery embolization for hypersplenism improves platelet count

Splenic embolization is a minimally invasive alternative to splenectomy for the treatment of hypersplenism. This was a retrospective study of 101 patients with hypersplenism caused by cirrhosis who were treated with splenic embolization and for whom 6 months of follow-up data were available. Of these patients, 65 underwent partial splenic artery embolization (PSE), including 23 who underwent repeated PSE (RPSE). The incidence of abdominal pain was significantly higher in the PSE group than in the total splenic artery embolization (TSE) group (P < 0.001), and its duration was also longer in the PSE group (P = 0.003). Biochemical markers of liver function were compared before and after the operation; aminotransferase indices decreased (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase), total bilirubin increased slightly, and albumin and prealbumin decreased after the operation (all P < 0.001). Platelet (PLT) counts began to increase at 1 week postoperatively, peaked at 1 month postoperatively, and then decreased gradually. There was no significant intergroup (PSE and TSE) difference at any time point (1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively, P > 0.05). There was a significant intergroup (PSE and RPSE) difference in the mean postoperative change in PLT count (P = 0.45). Splenic embolization can improve the inflammatory indicators of liver function. Performing PSE twice or more improves the PLT counts.