Computed tomography is inaccurate in estimating the severity of adult splenic injury

Splenic artery embolization improves outcomes and decreases the length of stay in hemodynamically stable blunt splenic injuries - A level 1 Australian Trauma centre experience

BACKGROUND

Splenic injuries are the most common visceral injury following blunt abdominal trauma. Increasingly, non-operative management (NOM) and the use of adjunctive splenic angioembolization (ASE) is favoured over operative management (OM) for the hemodynamically stable patient. However, clinical predictors for successful NOM, particularly the role of ASE as an adjunct, remain poorly defined. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing ASE vs NOM.

METHODS

A retrospective clinical audit was performed of all patients admitted with blunt splenic injury (BSI) from January 2005 to January 2018 at the Royal Adelaide Hospital. The primary outcome was ASE or NOM failure rate. Secondary outcomes were grade of splenic injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), length of hospital stay (LOS), and delayed OM or re-angioembolization rates.

RESULTS

Of 208 patients with BSI, 60 (29%) underwent OM, 54 (26%) ASE, and 94 (45%) NOM only. Patients were predominantly male 165 (79%), with a median age of 33 (IQR 24-51) years. The median ISS was 29 (20-38). There was no difference in the overall success rates for each modality of primary management (48 (89%) ASE vs 77 (82%) NOM, p = 0.374), though patients managed with ASE were older (38 vs 30 years, p = 0.029), had higher grade of splenic injury (grade ≥ IV 42 (78%) vs 8 (8.5%), p<0.001), with increased rates of haemo-peritoneum (46 (85%) vs 51 (54%), p<0.001) and contrast blush (42 (78%) vs 2 (2%), p<0.001). However, for grade III splenic injury, patients managed with ASE had a trend towards better outcome with no failures when compared to the NOM group (0 (0%) vs 8 (35%), p = 0.070) with a significant reduction in LOS (7.2 vs 10.8 days, p = 0.042). Furthermore, the ASE group overall had a significantly shorter LOS compared to the NOM group (10.0 vs 16.0 days, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

ASE as an adjunct to NOM significantly reduces the length of stay in BSI patients and is most successful in managing AAST grade III injuries.

Validation of the revised 2018 AAST-OIS classification and the CT severity index for prediction of operative management and survival in patients with blunt spleen and liver injuries

Objectives

Non-operative management (NOM) is increasingly utilised in blunt abdominal trauma. The 1994 American Association of Surgery of Trauma grading (1994-AAST) is applied for clinical decision-making in many institutions. Recently, classifications incorporating contrast extravasation such as the CT severity index (CTSI) and 2018 update of the liver and spleen AAST were proposed to predict outcome and guide treatment, but validation is pending.

Methods

CT images of patients admitted 2000–2016 with blunt splenic and hepatic injury were systematically re-evaluated for 1994/2018-AAST and CTSI grading. Diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for prediction of in-hospital mortality. Correlation with treatment strategy was assessed by Cramer V statistics.

Results

Seven hundred and three patients were analysed, 271 with splenic, 352 with hepatic and 80 with hepatosplenic injury. Primary NOM was applied in 83% of patients; mortality was 4.8%. Comparing prediction of mortality in mild and severe splenic injuries, the CTSI (3.1% vs. 10.3%; diagnostic accuracy = 75.4%; DOR = 3.66; p = 0.006) and 1994-AAST (3.3% vs. 10.5%; diagnostic accuracy = 77.9%; DOR = 3.45; p = 0.010) were more accurate compared with the 2018-AAST (3.4% vs. 8%; diagnostic accuracy = 68.2%; DOR = 2.50; p = 0.059). In hepatic injuries, the CTSI was superior to both AAST classifications in terms of diagnostic accuracy (88.7% vs. 77.1% and 77.3%, respectively). CTSI and 2018-AAST correlated better with the need for surgery in severe vs. mild hepatic (Cramer V = 0.464 and 0.498) and splenic injuries (Cramer V = 0.273 and 0.293) compared with 1994-AAST (Cramer V = 0.389 and 0.255; all p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The 2018-AAST and CTSI are superior to the 1994-AAST in correlation with operative treatment in splenic and hepatic trauma. The CTSI outperforms the 2018-AAST in mortality prediction.

Key Points

• Non-operative management of blunt abdominal trauma is increasingly applied and correct patient stratification is crucial.

• CT-based scoring systems are used to assess injury severity and guide clinical decision-making, whereby the 1994 version of the American Association of Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale (AAST-OIS) is currently most commonly utilised.

• Including contrast media extravasation in CT-based grading improves management and outcome prediction. While the 2018-AAST classification and the CT-severity-index (CTSI) better correlate with need for surgery compared to the 1994-AAST, the CTSI is superior in outcome-prediction to the 2018-AAST.

Non-operative management of blunt hepatic and splenic injuries-practical aspects and value of radiological scoring systems

Background

Non-operative management (NOM) of blunt hepatic and splenic injuries has become popular in haemodynamically stable adult patients, despite uncertainty about efficacy, patient selection, and details of management. Up-to-date strategies and practical recommendations are presented.

Methods

A selective literature search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane Library (1989–2016).

Results

No randomized clinical trial was found. Non-randomized controlled trials and large retrospective and prospective series dominate. Few systematic reviews and meta-analyses are available. NOM of selected patients with blunt liver and spleen injuries is associated with low morbidity and mortality. Only data of limited evidence are available on intensity and duration of patient monitoring, repeat imaging, antithrombotic prophylaxis and return to normal activity. There is high-level evidence on early mobilisation and post-splenectomy vaccination.

Conclusion

NOM of blunt liver or spleen injuries is a worldwide trend, but the literature does not provide high-grade evidence for this strategy.

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.

Inter-radiologist agreement for CT scoring of pediatric splenic injuries and effect on an established clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

The American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) advocates for the use of a clinical practice guideline to direct management of hemodynamically stable pediatric spleen injuries. The clinical practice guideline is based on the CT score of the spleen injury according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) CT scoring system.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the potential effect of radiologist agreement for CT scoring of pediatric spleen injuries on an established APSA clinical practice guideline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed blunt splenic injuries occurring in children from January 2007 to January 2012 at a single level 1 trauma center (n = 90). Abdominal CT exams performed at clinical presentation were reviewed by four radiologists who documented the following: (1) splenic injury grade (AAST system), (2) arterial extravasation and (3) pseudoaneurysm. Inter-rater agreement for AAST injury grade was assessed using the multi-rater Fleiss kappa and Kendall coefficient of concordance. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using weighted (AAST injury grade) or prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted (binary measures) kappa statistics; 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We evaluated the hypothetical effect of radiologist disagreement on an established APSA clinical practice guideline.

RESULTS

Inter-rater agreement was good for absolute AAST injury grade (kappa: 0.64 [0.59–0.69]) and excellent for relative AAST injury grade (Kendall w: 0.90). All radiologists agreed on the AAST grade in 52% of cases. Based on an established clinical practice guideline, radiologist disagreement could have changed the decision for intensive care management in 11% (10/90) of children, changed the length of hospital stay in 44% (40/90), and changed the time to return to normal activity in 44% (40/90).

CONCLUSION

Radiologist agreement when assigning splenic AAST injury grades is less than perfect, and disagreements have the potential to change management in a substantial number of pediatric patients.

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.

Reliability of injury grading systems for patients with blunt splenic trauma

OBJECTIVES

The most widely used grading system for blunt splenic injury is the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) organ injury scale. In 2007 a new grading system was developed. This 'Baltimore CT grading system' is superior to the AAST classification system in predicting the need for angiography and embolization or surgery. The objective of this study was to assess inter- and intraobserver reliability between radiologists in classifying splenic injury according to both grading systems.

METHODS

CT scans of 83 patients with blunt splenic injury admitted between 1998 and 2008 to an academic Level 1 trauma centre were retrospectively reviewed. Inter and intrarater reliability were expressed in Cohen's or weighted Kappa values.

RESULTS

Overall weighted interobserver Kappa coefficients for the AAST and 'Baltimore CT grading system' were respectively substantial (kappa=0.80) and almost perfect (kappa=0.85). Average weighted intraobserver Kappa's values were in the 'almost perfect' range (AAST: kappa=0.91, 'Baltimore CT grading system': kappa=0.81).

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that overall the inter- and intraobserver reliability for grading splenic injury according to the AAST grading system and 'Baltimore CT grading system' are equally high. Because of the integration of vascular injury, the 'Baltimore CT grading system' supports clinical decision making. We therefore recommend use of this system in the classification of splenic injury.

Multidetector CT of blunt abdominal trauma

The morbidity, mortality, and economic costs resulting from trauma in general, and blunt abdominal trauma in particular, are substantial. The "panscan" (computed tomographic [CT] examination of the head, neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis) has become an essential element in the early evaluation and decision-making algorithm for hemodynamically stable patients who sustained abdominal trauma. CT has virtually replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage for the detection of important injuries. Over the past decade, substantial hardware and software developments in CT technology, especially the introduction and refinement of multidetector scanners, have expanded the versatility of CT for examination of the polytrauma patient in multiple facets: higher spatial resolution, faster image acquisition and reconstruction, and improved patient safety (optimization of radiation delivery methods). In this article, the authors review the elements of multidetector CT technique that are currently relevant for evaluating blunt abdominal trauma and describe the most important CT signs of trauma in the various organs. Because conservative nonsurgical therapy is preferred for all but the most severe injuries affecting the solid viscera, the authors emphasize the CT findings that are indications for direct therapeutic intervention.

Correlation of operative and pathological injury grade with computed tomographic grade in the failed nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography (CT) is the standard for grading blunt splenic injuries, but the true accuracy, especially for grade IV or V injuries as compared to pathological findings, is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study from 2005 to 2011 was undertaken.

RESULTS

There were 214 adults admitted with blunt splenic injury and 170 (79%) were managed nonoperatively. The remaining 44 patients (21%) required surgical intervention. There was a significant difference in the Injury Severity Score (ISS) between those who did and those who did not require splenectomy: median 31 (interquartile [IQ] range 11-51) versus 22 (IQ range 9-35, p = 0.0002). Ten patients presented in shock, had a positive ultrasound, and went to surgery. The remaining 34 had CT scans prior to surgery. Twenty-five (73%) had injury grades IV or V. The CT scan correctly graded the injury in 14 (41%) and was incorrect in 20 (59%). The assigned grade by the CT scan underestimated the true injury grade by one grade in six cases (30%), by two or more grades in nine (45%), and the CT images were obscured by blood and deemed "ungradeable" in five (25%). The CT scan was more accurate for grades I and II (100%) than for grades III-V (25-43%). The reasons for inaccuracy were either inability to visualize that the laceration involved the hilar vessels or excessive perisplenic blood which obscured the injury and/or the hilum.

CONCLUSIONS

CT for splenic injury is accurate for grades I and II, but underestimates the true extent of injury for grades III-V. The reasons for the lack of correlation are the inability to determine hilar involvement and excessive perisplenic blood obscuring the injury. Patients with these image characteristics by CT scan should undergo splenectomy earlier if there are any signs of hemodynamic instability.

Literature review of the role of ultrasound, computed tomography, and transcatheter arterial embolization for the treatment of traumatic splenic injuries

Introduction

The spleen is the second most frequently injured organ following blunt abdominal trauma. Trends in management have changed over the years. Traditionally, laparotomy and splenectomy was the standard management. Presently, nonoperative management (NOM) of splenic injury is the most common management strategy in hemodynamically stable patients. Splenic injuries can be managed via simple observation (OBS) or with angiography and embolization (AE). Angio-embolization has shown to be a valuable alternative to observational management and has increased the success rate of nonoperative management in many series.

Diagnostics

Improved imaging techniques and advances in interventional radiology have led to a better selection of patients who are amenable to nonoperative management. Despite this, there is still a lot of debate about which patients are prone to NOM.

Angiography and Embolization

The optimal patient selection is still a matter of debate and the role of CT and angio-embolization has not yet fully evolved. We discuss the role of sonography and CT features, such as contrast extravasation, pseudoaneurysms, arteriovenous fistulas, or hemoperitoneum, to determine the optimal patient selection for angiography and embolization. We also review the efficiency, technical considerations (proximal or selective embolization), logistics, and complication rates of AE for blunt traumatic splenic injuries.

Management of pediatric blunt splenic injuries in Canada--practices and opinions

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to compare the self-reported practice patterns of Canadian general surgeons (GSs) and pediatric general surgeons (PGSs) in treating blunt splenic injuries (BSIs) in children.

METHODS

Forty-five PGSs and 690 GSs were surveyed (internet and hard copy). chi(2) was used to compare groups; logistic regression was performed to determine independent factors influencing management variables.

RESULTS

Thirty-three PGSs and 191 GSs completed the survey, for a response rate of 30%. Pediatric general surgeons are more likely than GSs to follow American Pediatric Surgical Association guidelines (52% vs 11%; P < .0001). In diagnosing BSIs, PGSs and GSs are equally likely to use computed tomography (CT) over ultrasound for initial imaging. Pediatric general surgeons are less likely to consider CT injury grade in deciding on nonoperative management (NOM) (odds ratio [OR], 0.2; confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.5; P = .002) and are more likely to continue NOM for patients with contrast blush on CT (OR, 6.5; CI, 2.5-17; P = .0002). Pediatric general surgeons report more selective intensive care unit use, hospital stay, follow-up imaging, and activity restrictions. No differences were found in the management of splenic artery pseudoaneurysms.

CONCLUSION

Differences exist between PGSs and GSs in the management of pediatric BSIs, resulting in higher operative rates, use of resources, and radiation exposure. Further education of GSs in NOM and establishment of management guidelines are indicated.

Computed Tomography Grading Systems Poorly Predict the Need for Intervention after Spleen and Liver Injuries

Computed tomography (CT) grading systems are often used clinically to forecast the need for interventions after abdominal trauma with solid organ injuries. We compared spleen and liver CT grading methods to determine their utility in predicting the need for operative intervention or angiographic embolization. Abdominal CT scans of 300 patients with spleen injuries, liver injuries, or both were evaluated by five trauma faculty members blinded to clinical outcomes. Studies were graded by American Association for the Surgery of Trauma criteria, a novel splenic injury CT grading system, and a novel liver injury grading system. The sensitivity and specificity of each methodology in predicting the need for intervention were calculated. The kappa statistic was used to determine interrater variability. Twenty-one per cent (39/189) of patients with splenic injuries visible on CT scans required interventions, whereas 14 per cent (21/154) of patients with liver injuries visible on CT required interventions. The overall sensitivity of all grading systems in predicting the need for surgery or angioembolization of the spleen or liver was poor; the specificity seemed to be fairly good. When evaluators were compared, the strength of agreement for the various scoring systems was only moderate. Anatomic CT grading systems are ineffective screening tools for excluding the need for operation or embolization after splenic or hepatic trauma. Although insensitive, CT is a good predictor (highly specific) of the need for intervention if certain definitive abnormalities are identified. Considerable inconsistency exists in interpretation of abdominal CT scans after trauma, even among experienced clinicians.

Proximal splenic angioembolization does not improve outcomes in treating blunt splenic injuries compared with splenectomy: a cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Although splenic angioembolization (SAE) has been introduced and adopted in many trauma centers, the appropriate selection for and utility of SAE in trauma patients remains under debate. This study examined the outcomes of proximal SAE as part of a management algorithm for adult traumatic splenic injury compared with splenectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on all hemodynamically stable (HDS) blunt trauma patients with isolated splenic injury and computed tomographic (CT) evidence of active contrast extravasation that presented to a level 1 Trauma Center over a period of 5 years. The cohorts were defined by two separate 30 month periods and included 78 patients seen before (group I) and 76 patients seen after (group II) the introduction of an institutional SAE protocol. Demographics, splenic injury grade, and outcomes of the two groups were compared using Student's t test, or chi2 test. Analysis was by intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

Six hundred eighty-two patients with blunt splenic injury were identified; 154 patients (29%) were HDS with CT evidence of active contrast extravasation. Group I (n = 78) was treated with splenectomy and group II (n = 76) was treated with proximal SAE. There was no difference in age (33 +/- 14 vs. 37 +/- 17 years), Injury Severity Score (31 +/- 13 vs. 29 +/- 11), or mortality (18% vs. 15%) between the two groups. However, the incidence of Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) was 4-fold higher in those patients that underwent proximal SAE compared with those that underwent splenectomy (22% vs. 5%, p = 0.002). Twenty two patients failed nonoperative management (NOM) after SAE. This failure appeared to be directly related to the grade of splenic organ injury (grade I and II: 0%; grade III: 24%; grade IV: 53%; and grade V: 100%).

CONCLUSION

Introduction of proximal SAE in NOM of HDS splenic trauma patients with active extravasation did not alter mortality rates at a Level 1 Trauma Center. Increased incidence of ARDS and association of failure of NOM with higher splenic organ injury score identify areas for cautionary application of proximal SAE in the more severely injured trauma patient population. Better patient selection guidelines for proximal SAE are needed. Without these guidelines, outcomes from SAE will still lack transparency.

Blunt splenic injuries: have we watched long enough?

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt splenic injuries (BSIs) has been used with increasing frequency in adult patients. There are currently no definitive guidelines established for how long BSI patients should be monitored for failure of NOM after injury.

METHODS

This study was performed to ascertain the length of inpatient observation needed to capture most failures, and to identify factors associated with failure of NOM. We utilized the National Trauma Data Bank to determine time to failure after BSI.

RESULTS

During the 5-year study period, 23,532 patients were identified with BSI, of which 2,366 (10% overall) were taken directly to surgery (within 2 hours of arrival). Of 21,166 patients initially managed nonoperatively, 18,506 were successful (79% of all-comers). Patients with isolated BSI are currently monitored approximately 5 days as inpatients. Of patients failing NOM, 95% failed during the first 72 hours, and monitoring 2 additional days saw only 1.5% more failures. Factors influencing success of NOM included computed tomographic injury grade, severity of patient injury, and American College of Surgeons designation of trauma center. Importantly, patients who failed NOM did not seem to have detrimental outcomes when compared with patients with successful NOM. No statistically significant predictive variables could be identified that would help predict patients who would go on to fail NOM.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that at least 80% of BSI can be managed successfully with NOM, and that patients should be monitored as inpatients for failure after BSI for 3 to 5 days.

Correlation of multidetector CT findings with splenic arteriography and surgery: prospective study in 392 patients

BACKGROUND

To determine the accuracy of contrast-enhanced multidetector CT (MDCT) in demonstrating splenic vascular injury based on results of splenic angiography and operation.

STUDY DESIGN

This institutional review board-approved study included 392 hemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients whose admission MDCTs demonstrated splenic injury. Images were assessed for parenchymal injury grade, hemoperitoneum volume, and evidence of bleeding and nonbleeding splenic vascular injury. Splenic arteriography was performed for high splenic injury grade and splenic vascular injury. Medical records were reviewed to determine arteriographic interpretation, surgery indications and findings, outcomes, and demographics. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of MDCT in detecting vascular injury were calculated based on results of arteriography and operation.

RESULTS

Splenic vascular injury was seen in 22% of patients (86 of 392) on MDCT. Presence of a vascular injury correlated with the CT-based parenchymal splenic injury grade (p < 0.0001). Active splenic bleeding was associated with subsequent clinical deterioration (p < 0.0001). Overall, MDCT had a sensitivity of 76% (76 of 100); specificity of 90% (95 of 106); negative and positive predictive values of 80% (95 of 119) and 87% (76 of 87), respectively; and accuracy of 83% (171 of 206) in detecting vascular injury compared with reference standards. The success rate of nonoperative management was 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

MDCT provides valuable information to direct initial clinical management of patients with blunt splenic trauma by demonstrating both active bleeding and nonbleeding vascular injuries. Not all vascular injuries are detected on MDCT, and splenic angiography is still indicated for high-grade parenchymal injury.

Experience with splenic main coil embolization and significance of new or persistent pseudoaneurym: reembolize, operate, or observe

BACKGROUND

To determine the need for further therapy in patients with persistent or new pseudoaneurysms (PSAs) after splenic main coil embolization.

METHODS

The institutional review board approved the study. The study group consisted of 400 hemodynamically stable patients (261 men, 139 women; mean age, 38.5 years) with blunt splenic injury. Abdominal computed tomography (ACT) images were assessed for grade of splenic injury, volume of hemoperitoneum, and evidence of splenic vascular injury including splenic vascular lesions and active bleeding. Splenic arteriography was performed for high-grade splenic injury and for ACT evidence of vascular injury. Follow-up ACT was reviewed for evidence of new or persistent PSAs after main coil embolization of the splenic artery. Medical records were reviewed to determine final outcome and any additional therapies used.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients had persistent (27) or new PSAs (5) after main coil embolization. Of these patients, two required splenectomy and one splenorrhaphy. The nonoperative salvage rate was 91% and the splenic salvage rate was 94%; this was comparable to the overall salvage rate of 95%.

CONCLUSION

Splenic embolization remains a valuable adjunct in splenic salvage. Patients with persistent or new splenic PSAs after main coil embolization have similar splenic salvage rates to the overall cohort without additional therapies.

Angiography and embolisation in blunt splenic injury: a review

The surgical care of patients has evolved over the last 50 years. Operative intervention in the face of blunt spleen injury has been supplanted by non-operative techniques. Two of the newest techniques, angiography and embolisation, are reviewed in this article with references to patient selection, technique used and outcomes. Furthermore, current weaknesses in the data available are discussed in order to provide surgeons with a complete overview of the techniques.

Optimization of selection for nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury: comparison of MDCT grading systems

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the usefulness of two CT grading systems of blunt splenic trauma in predicting which patients need surgery or angioembolization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four hundred patients in hemodynamically stable condition admitted with blunt splenic injury were included in the study. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced MDCT. Grade of splenic injury was prospectively assigned according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) splenic injury scale. Patients were treated with surgical intervention, splenic arteriography with or without embolization, or observation alone. All MDCT images were retrospectively reviewed and regraded according to a novel grading system that specifically incorporates the findings of active bleeding or splenic vascular injury, including pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula. Receiver operating characteristics curves were generated with both grading systems for all splenic interventions, and statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The area under the ROC curves for the new splenic grading system for splenic arteriography, surgery, and both interventions exceeded 80%. The area under the curve for the new splenic grading system was greater than that for the AAST injury scale for all interventions. Differences were found to be statistically significant for splenic arteriography (p = 0.0036) and the combination of arteriography and surgery (p = 0.0006).

CONCLUSION

The proposed CT grading system is better than the AAST system for predicting which patients with blunt splenic trauma need arteriography or splenic intervention.

Nonoperative management of severe blunt splenic injury: are we getting better?

BACKGROUND

Most minor splenic injuries are readily treated nonoperatively but controversy exists regarding the role of nonoperative management for higher-grade injuries. The infrequency of these injuries has made evaluation of factors critical to their management difficult.

METHODS

Through the National Trauma Data Bank, 3,085 adults sustaining severe (Abbreviated Injury Scale score > or = 4) blunt splenic injury from 1997 to 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient management, demographic information, physiologic data, procedures performed, and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Nonoperative management was attempted in 40.5% of patients but ultimately failed in 54.6% of those. Failure of nonoperative management was associated with increased age, low admission systolic blood pressure, higher injury severity score, and increased hospital and intensive care unit length of stay. Mortality associated with failure of nonoperative management (12.3%) and successful observation (13.8%) was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative management of higher-grade splenic injuries is associated with a high rate of failure and prolonged hospital stay. Careful judgment must be exercised in applying nonoperative management to patients with severe splenic injuries.

The role of diagnostic algorithms in the management of blunt splenic injury

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic algorithms for patients with blunt abdominal trauma have been in use since 1995. This study investigated the role of diagnostic algorithms in the management of adult patients with blunt splenic injury at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of hospital records was performed to enroll patients with blunt injury of the spleen. Demographic data and information about injury severity, diagnostic methods, management and final outcomes were evaluated. Patients were separated into an early and late group according to the year that diagnostic algorithms were used (1990-1994 or 1995-1999).

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-one patients were enrolled. Initially, 71 patients had an operation (OP group), whereas 50 received non-operative management (NOM group). Patients in the OP versus NOM group had lower blood pressure and greater transfusion volumes in the emergency room, higher grade splenic injury, and a greater rate of intra-abdominal-related injury. NOM failed in 7 patients (14%). Early- versus late-group patients were less likely to have NOM and high grade splenic injury; however, the rate of NOM failure was not different between the early and late groups.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic algorithms using sonograms for screening provide an initial means of selecting patients for NOM. Patients with higher grades of splenic injury can then be managed non-operatively.

Failure of Observation of Blunt Splenic Injury in Adults: Variability in Practice and Adverse Consequences

BACKGROUND

The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multiinstitutional Workgroup reported a failure rate for nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults of 10.8%. Sixty percent of the failures occurred within 24 hours of admission. The purpose of this multiinstitutional study by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma was to determine common variables in failure of nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults.

STUDY DESIGN

Medical records were reviewed in a blinded fashion on 78 patients in whom nonoperative management failed. Statistical analysis was performed with ANOVA, extended chi-square, and Fisher's exact test; statistical significance was p<0.05.

RESULTS

The 78 patients were categorized based on hemodynamic status. Forty-four percent were stable; 31% had transient hypotension or tachycardia that resolved with fluid infusion (responders); and 25% were unstable. Two-thirds of the unstable patients required laparotomy within 12 hours of admission; all had laparotomy within 72 hours. Mortality was significantly different when comparing the unstable to the stable and responder groups: stable (3%), responders (8%), and unstable (37%), despite similar age and only modest differences in Injury Severity Score. Eight CT scans were misinterpreted initially. Of 26 Focused Abdominal Sonography for Trauma (FAST) studies, 11 (42.3%) were false negative. Abnormal abdominal findings were noted in 67.7% of patients on admission. Ten patients died (12.8%). Sixty percent of the deaths were caused largely by delayed treatment of splenic or other abdominal injuries; one patient died in the responder group and five unstable patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty percent to 40% of the patients who had unsuccessful nonoperative management in this study were selected inappropriately, with hemodynamic instability or initial misinterpretation of diagnostic studies. As a consequence, the majority of the deaths were from delayed treatment of intraabdominal injuries. This article suggests that written protocols, better adherence to sound clinical judgment, and experienced and timely interpretation of radiologic studies would reduce the incidence of failure of nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults.

Use of splenic artery embolization as an adjunct to nonsurgical management of blunt splenic injury

BACKGROUND

Splenic artery embolization (SAE) has been used as an adjunct to the nonsurgical treatment of blunt splenic injuries since 1981. It is imperative to define the role of SAE in the management of splenic trauma and to establish a guideline for its use.

METHODS

In this study, 39 consecutive patients with blunt splenic ruptures were evaluated. All the patients were treated according to the authors' protocol, which included SAE as an adjunct. Angiographic study was performed for patients with any of the following presentations: recurrent hypotension despite fluid resuscitation, significant hemoperitoneum or extravasation of contrast media on computed tomography, grade 4 or 5 splenic injury, or progressive need for blood transfusion. Laparotomy was reserved for patients with unstable hemodynamics or failure of SAE.

RESULTS

Four patients were excluded from the study, and 6 of the 35 remaining patients (male-to-female ratio, 22:13) received SAE. One of the six SAE patients underwent operation because of persistent hemorrhage after SAE. Nonoperative treatment was successful for 31 patients. Splenic artery embolization increased the success rate for nonsurgical management from 74% (26 of 35 patients) to 89% (31 of 35 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Judicious use of SAE for patients with blunt splenic injury avoids unnecessary surgery and expands the number of patients who can retain their spleen.

Factors affecting clinical outcome of patients who undergo transcatheter arterial embolisation in splenic injury

Transcatheter arterial embolisation (TAE) offers a less invasive approach to traditional laparotomy for the management of bleeding in the context of blunt splenic injury. This is a retrospective review study to identify clinical factors associated with clinical outcome of the patients who underwent this procedure. Of 65 patients with splenic injuries at our institution, 26 patients underwent TAE for management of bleeding. The following factors were assessed to determine their relationship to procedure outcomes: American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grade, complications, age, shock index, injury severity score (ISS), haemoglobin (Hb), haematocrit (Ht), prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), systolic blood pressure (BP), BP changes during TAE, blood transfused before TAE and timing of TAE. The overall good clinical outcome rate was 73.1% (19/26). Of the factors we assessed, absence of concomitant pelvic injury, higher Hb, higher Ht, higher BP, greater increases in BP during TAE and a decreased requirement for blood transfusions before TAE were associated with good clinical outcome of the patients who underwent TAE in splenic injury.

Management of adult blunt splenic injuries: comparison between level I and level II trauma centers

BACKGROUND

The factors important in determining outcome when managing adult blunt splenic injuries continue to be debated. Whether trauma center level designation (Level I versus Level II) affects patient management has not been evaluated.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data from the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database that collected information from 27 statewide trauma centers (Level I [15], Level II [17]). Adult patients (ages > or = 16 years) with blunt splenic injuries (ICD-9-CM 865) were evaluated. Demographic data, injury data, and trauma center level designation were collected, and patient management, length of stay, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 2,138 adult patients who suffered blunt splenic injuries during the study period (1998-2000). Patients treated at Level II trauma centers (n = 772) had a higher rate of operative treatment (38.2% versus 30.7%) (p < 0.001), but a shorter mean length of stay (10.1 +/- 0.4 versus 12.0 +/- 0.4 days) (p < 0.01) compared with patients in Level I trauma centers (n = 1,366). The rate of failure of nonoperative treatment was lower at Level II trauma centers (13.0% versus 17.6%) (p < 0.05), but the mortality for patients managed nonoperatively was higher (8.4% versus 4.5%) (p < 0.05). Splenorrhaphy was performed more frequently in Level I trauma centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Management differences exist in the treatment of adult blunt splenic injuries between institutions of different trauma center level designation. Multicenter studies should account for this finding in design and implementation.

Implications of the "contrast blush" finding on computed tomographic scan of the spleen in trauma

BACKGROUND

The "contrast blush" (CB) computed tomographic (CT) scan finding has often been used clinically as an indicator for therapeutic splenic intervention (SI) (splenectomy, splenorrhaphy, or angiographic embolization). We sought to examine the prognostic significance of this finding.

METHODS

The records and CT scans of 324 trauma patients from two Level I trauma centers who had blunt splenic injury and a CT scan of the abdomen within 24 hours of admission were reviewed and screened for CB.

RESULTS

CB was identified in 11% of patients, and its incidence was significantly related to the grade of injury: grade I/II, 3.2%; grade III, 11.8%; and grade IV/V, 26.3% (p < 0.001). SI was also related to the grade: grade I/II, 7.7%; grade III, 37.6%; and grade IV/V, 69.7% (p < 0.001). The chance of having SI was greater in those with CB (75.0%) when compared with those without CB (25.0%) (p < 0.001; odds ratio, 9.2). A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that SI correlated independently with splenic grade, emergency department hypotension, and age, but did not demonstrate a correlation with CB.

CONCLUSION

CB is not an absolute indication for an operative or angiographic intervention. Factors such as patient age, grade of injury, and presence of hypotension need to be considered in the clinical management of these patients.

Nonsurgical management of blunt splenic injury: use of CT criteria to select patients for splenic arteriography and potential endovascular therapy

PURPOSE

To determine if contrast material-enhanced spiral computed tomography (CT) can be used to select patients with blunt splenic injuries to undergo arteriographic embolization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During a 15-month period, 78 patients who were hemodynamically stable and required no immediate surgery underwent contrast-enhanced spiral CT followed by splenic arteriography. CT scans were assessed for splenic vascular contrast material extravasation or posttraumatic splenic vascular lesions. Medical records were reviewed for splenic arteriographic results and clinical outcome.

RESULTS

There were 25 grade I, 12 grade II, 27 grade III, 12 grade IV, and two grade V splenic injuries. CT showed active contrast material extravasation in seven patients and splenic vascular lesions in 19 patients. At CT, splenic vascular contrast material extravasation was 100% (seven of seven patients) and a posttraumatic splenic vascular lesion was 83% (10 of 12 patients) sensitive on the basis of arteriographic or surgical outcome in predicting the need for transcatheter embolization or splenic surgery. Overall, CT had a sensitivity of 81% (17 of 21 patients), a specificity of 84% (48 of 57 patients), negative and positive predictive values of 92% (48 of 52 patients) and 65% (17 of 26 patients), respectively, and an accuracy of 83% (65 of 78 patients) in predicting the need for splenic injury treatment.

CONCLUSION

Contrast-enhanced spiral CT plays a valuable role in selecting hemodynamically stable patients with splenic vascular injury who may be treated with transcatheter therapy and potentially improves the success rate of nonsurgical management.

Blunt splenic injury in adults: Multi-institutional Study of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management of blunt injury to the spleen in adults has been applied with increasing frequency. However, the criteria for nonoperative management are controversial. The purpose of this multi-institutional study was to determine which factors predict successful observation of blunt splenic injury in adults.

METHODS

A total of 1,488 adults (>15 years of age) with blunt splenic injury from 27 trauma centers in 1997 were studied through the Multi-institutional Trials Committee of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma. Statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance and extended chi2 test. Data are expressed as mean +/- SD; a value of p < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 38.5 % of patients went directly to the operating room (group I); 61.5% of patients were admitted with planned nonoperative management. Of the patients admitted with planned observation, 10.8% failed and required laparotomy; 82.1% of patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) < 15 and 46.6% of patients with ISS > 15 were successfully observed. Frequency of immediate operation correlated with American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grades of splenic injury: I (23.9%), II (22.4%), III (38.1%), IV (73.7%), and V (94.9%) (p < 0.05). Of patients initially managed nonoperatively, the failure rate increased significantly by AAST grade of splenic injury: I (4.8%), II (9.5%), III (19.6%), IV (33.3%), and V (75.0%) (p < 0.05). A total of 60.9% of the patients failed nonoperative management within 24 hours of admission; 8% failed 9 days or later after injury. Laparotomy was ultimately performed in 19.9% of patients with small hemoperitoneum, 49.4% of patients with moderate hemoperitoneum, and 72.6% of patients with large hemoperitoneum.

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter study, 38.5% of adults with blunt splenic injury went directly to laparotomy. Ultimately, 54.8% of patients were successfully managed nonoperatively; the failure rate of planned observation was 10.8%, with 60.9% of failures occurring in the first 24 hours. Successful nonoperative management was associated with higher blood pressure and hematocrit, and less severe injury based on ISS, Glasgow Coma Scale, grade of splenic injury, and quantity of hemoperitoneum.

Nonoperative Management of Blunt Splenic Injury in Adults 55 Years and Older: A Twenty-Year Experience

The nonoperative management of splenic injury secondary to blunt trauma in older patients remains controversial. We have reviewed our experience from January 1978 to December 1997 with selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults 55 years and older. Criteria for nonoperative management included hemodynamic stability with any transient hypotension corrected using less than 2000 cm3 crystalloid infusion, a negative abdominal physical examination ruling out associated injuries, and a blood transfusion requirement of no more than 2 units attributable to the splenic injury. During the study period, 18 patients over age 55 with radiographic confirmation of a splenic injury met the above criteria for nonoperative management. Their mean age was 72 years (range 56–86), and 13 of the 18 were female (72%). The mean Injury Severity Score was 15 (range 4–29), with the mechanism of injury equally divided between automobile crashes (9) and falls (9). During a similar time period, 15 patients 55 years or older with splenic injury composed an operative group; these patients did not differ with respect to age (mean 68 years), sex (60% female), or mechanism of injury. CT scans of 8 patients managed nonoperatively were available and graded using the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification, with a mean score of 2.3 (range 2–3). Eight of the 18 nonsurgical patients received blood transfusions. None of the 18 patients who met the criteria for nonoperative management “failed” the protocol, and none were taken to the operating room for abdominal exploration. Two patients (11%) died of associated thoracic injuries after lengthy hospital stays, one at 10 days and one at 24 days. We conclude from our data that nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in patients age 55 years and older is indicated provided they are hemodynamically stable, do not require significant blood transfusion, and have no other associated abdominal injuries.

Nonsurgical Management of Solid Abdominal Organ Injury in Patients over 55 Years of Age

Age greater than 55 is often stated to be a contraindication to nonoperative management of intraperitoneal solid organ injury, based upon failures in early experiences of nonoperative therapy. Refinements in the criteria for nonoperative management of hepatic and splenic injuries have yielded improved success rates compared with those in initial reports, raising questions as to the validity of an age-related contraindication. A retrospective chart review of patients more than 55 years of age sustaining blunt hepatic and/or splenic injury at two urban Level I trauma centers was performed. Patients were stratified into three groups in which selection criteria could not consistently be determined: those managed nonoperatively, those managed operatively, and those who died within 24 hours. The purpose of this review is to identify whether age is a determinant for nonoperative management of abdominal solid organ injury. Eighty-eight patients were identified (mean age, 68.7 ± 9.8), 17 of whom died in the emergency department or after operative intervention. Of the remaining 71 patients, 37 were originally managed nonoperatively (mean age 69.9 ± 9.1, mean Injury Severity Score 19.9), 24 sustained hepatic injuries (grades I–IV), 12 sustained splenic injuries (grades I–III), and one patient sustained both organ injuries. Three patients with multisystem trauma died from complications unrelated to their solid organ injury (one brain death, one septic death, and one respiratory arrest). A single patient, with a grade I liver injury, required delayed exploration (for a persistent, unexplained metabolic acidosis) and underwent a nontherapeutic celiotomy. All but one of the 37 patients were successfully treated nonoperatively, for a 97 per cent success rate. We conclude that hemodynamically stable patients more than 55 years of age sustaining intra-abdominal injury can be observed safely. Age alone should no longer be considered an exclusion criterion for nonoperative management of intraabdominal solid organ injury.

Blunt trauma to the spleen

BACKGROUND

The management of splenic injury resulting from blunt trauma in adults is controversial, with an increasing trend towards non-operative management and conservation of the spleen. A retrospective review was performed on adult patients treated in a single institution for splenic injury resulting from blunt trauma in an attempt to identify factors important in selecting an appropriate management option and predicting the success of that option.

METHODS

Associated injuries (standardized using Injury Severity Scores), clinical signs at presentation, computed tomographic grading of splenic injury, and transfusion requirements were documented. Statistical analysis was performed using non-parametric Mann-Whitney, Chi-squared, Kolmogorov-Smirnov and multivariate logistic regression tests.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were identified. Non-operative management was used on 39 patients, splenic conservation on 14 patients, and splenectomy on 32 patients. The mean Injury Severity Score was significantly lower in the non-operative group. Computed tomographic grading of the splenic injury was not found to correlate well with intraoperative findings. Transfusion requirements were lower in the non-operative group. Non-operative management failed in four patients; two had continued splenic bleeding, and two required surgery for other intra-abdominal injuries. Overall mortality was 7%. There was one death in the splenic conservation group, unrelated to the splenic injury, and two patients required a second laparotomy and splenectomy for persistent splenic bleeding. There were five deaths in the splenectomy group, only one of which was related to the splenic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Management of blunt splenic injury remains controversial. The decision to pursue non-operative management rather than splenic conservation or splenectomy depends on the individual merits of each case. There is an increasing trend towards splenic conservation, particularly in younger, stable patients with single organ injury.

Splenic injury: trends in evaluation and management

BACKGROUND

Changing methods of evaluating blunt abdominal trauma and expanding selection criteria for nonoperative management (NOM) of splenic injury can increase the number of patients managed nonoperatively without affecting success rates.

METHODS

The charts of 164 patients with blunt splenic injuries from July 1, 1991, to June 30, 1996, were reviewed. Thirty-eight patients were excluded because of immediate laparotomy without adjunctive tests or expiration in the resuscitative period. Injuries were graded according to the Organ Injury Scale.

RESULTS

Overall, successful NOM occurred in 84% of patients (73 of 87). NOM was successful in 5 of 7 patients > 55 years old and in 14 of 15 patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores < 13.

CONCLUSION

Use of computed tomography increased NOM of splenic trauma from 11 to 71% during the 5-year period for injuries of equivalent severity. Age > 55 years or abnormal neurologic status should not preclude NOM, because success was related only to injury grade.

Management of blunt splenic trauma: significant differences between adults and children

BACKGROUND

Although highly successful in children, nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults is less defined. The purpose of this study was to determine whether mechanism of injury, grade of splenic injury, associated injuries, and pattern of injury differ between adults and children (younger than 15 years of age).

METHODS

Four hundred eleven patients (293 adults and 118 pediatric patients) with blunt splenic injury were admitted to an affiliated adult/pediatric trauma program from 1989 to 1994. Computed tomography (CT) scans were interpreted in a blinded fashion. Mechanism of injury was significantly different for adults versus children (p < 0.05): motor vehicle crash (66.9% versus 23.7%), motorcycle (8.8% versus 0.8%), sports (2.4% versus 16.9%), falls (8.8% versus 25.4%), pedestrian/automobile (4.4% versus 11.0%), bicycle (1.4% versus 9.3%), and other (7.3% versus 12.7%).

RESULTS

Higher injury severity scores, lower Glasgow Coma Scales, and higher mortality indicated that the adults were more severely injured than the children. Fifty-nine percent of the adults and 7% of the children required immediate laparotomy for splenic injury. Both CT grade and quantity of blood on CT predicted the need for exploration in adults but not in children. An injury severity score above 15 and high-energy mechanisms correlated with the need for operative intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than children simply being physically different, they are injured differently than adults, hence the high rate of nonoperative management.