Ullah W, Rashid MU, Mehmood A, Zafar Y, Hussain I, Sarvepalli D, Hasan MK. Splenic injuries secondary to colonoscopy: Rare but serious complication.
World J Gastrointest Surg 2020;
12:55-67. [PMID:
32128029 PMCID:
PMC7044106 DOI:
10.4240/wjgs.v12.i2.55]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2019] [Revised: 11/23/2019] [Accepted: 12/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Colonoscopy is a safe and routine diagnostic and therapeutic procedure for evaluation of large bowel diseases. Most common procedure related complications include bleeding and perforation but rarely a splenic Injury.
AIM
To investigate the reason for colonoscopy, presentation of patient with spleen injury, types of injury, diagnosis, management and outcomes of patients
METHODS
A structured search on four databases was done and 45 articles with 68 patients were selected. The reason for colonoscopy, presentation of patient with spleen injury, types of injury, diagnosis, management and outcomes of patients were identified and analyzed using SPSS.
RESULTS
The mean age of the patients was 62.7 years with 64% females. Twenty two percent had a complete splenic rupture with colonoscopy while 63% had subcapsular hematoma, spleen laceration and spleen avulsion. The most common reason for colonoscopy was screening (46%) followed by diagnostic colonoscopy (28%). Eighty seven percent of patients presented with abdominal pain. Patients with spleen rupture mostly required splenectomy (47%), while minor spleen hematomas and lacerations were managed conservatively (38%). Six percent of the patients were managed with proximal splenic artery splenic embolization and 4% were managed with laparoscopic repair. The overall mortality was 10% while 77% had complete recovery. The reason of colonoscopy against presentation specifically, abdominal pain showed no statistical significance P = 0.69. The indication of colonoscopy had no significant impact on incidence of splenic injury (P = 0.89). Majority of the patients (47%) were managed with splenectomy while the rest were managed conservatively (P = 0.04). This association was moderately strong at a cramer’s V test (0.34). The Fisher exact test showed a higher mortality with spleen rupture (P = 0.028).
CONCLUSION
Spleen rupture due to colonoscopy is a significant concern and is associated with high mortality. The management of the patients can be individualized based on clinical presentation.
Collapse