BACKGROUND: Debate continues about the optimal management strategy for patients with renal injury. PURPOSE: To report the diagnostics and treatment applied in a level 1 trauma centre and to compare it to the recommendations of the European Association of Urology guidelines concerning blunt renal injury. METHODS: The management of all patients with blunt renal injury, admitted to the level 1 trauma centre of the Academic Medical Centre, between January 2005 and December 2009 was reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Median age and ISS of the 186 included patients were 40 and 17 years respectively. All but one haemodynamically stable patients with microscopic haematuria received nonoperative management. Sixty percent of the haemodynamically stable patients with gross haematuria underwent CT scanning. Patients with grade 1-4 renal injury received nonoperative management. Additionally, two patients with grade 3-4 renal injury received angiography and embolization (A&E). One patient with grade 5 injury underwent renal exploration and two A&E. Seven of the 8 haemodynamically unstable patients underwent emergency laparotomy and in 2 patients, haemodynamically unstable because of renal injury, A&E was performed as an adjunct to surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, violation of the guidelines increased with injury severity. A&E can provide both a useful adjunct to nonoperative management and alternative to surgical intervention in specialised centres with appropriate equipment and expertise, even in patients with high grade renal injury. We advocate an update of the guidelines with a more prominent role of A&E.
BACKGROUND: Debate continues about the optimal management strategy for patients with renal injury. PURPOSE: To report the diagnostics and treatment applied in a level 1 trauma centre and to compare it to the recommendations of the European Association of Urology guidelines concerning blunt renal injury. METHODS: The management of all patients with blunt renal injury, admitted to the level 1 trauma centre of the Academic Medical Centre, between January 2005 and December 2009 was reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Median age and ISS of the 186 included patients were 40 and 17 years respectively. All but one haemodynamically stable patients with microscopic haematuria received nonoperative management. Sixty percent of the haemodynamically stable patients with gross haematuria underwent CT scanning. Patients with grade 1-4 renal injury received nonoperative management. Additionally, two patients with grade 3-4 renal injury received angiography and embolization (A&E). One patient with grade 5 injury underwent renal exploration and two A&E. Seven of the 8 haemodynamically unstable patients underwent emergency laparotomy and in 2 patients, haemodynamically unstable because of renal injury, A&E was performed as an adjunct to surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, violation of the guidelines increased with injury severity. A&E can provide both a useful adjunct to nonoperative management and alternative to surgical intervention in specialised centres with appropriate equipment and expertise, even in patients with high grade renal injury. We advocate an update of the guidelines with a more prominent role of A&E.
Authors: S A I Loggers; T W A Koedam; G F Giannakopoulos; E Vandewalle; M Erwteman; W P Zuidema Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Andrea Mingoli; Marco La Torre; Emanuele Migliori; Bruno Cirillo; Martina Zambon; Paolo Sapienza; Gioia Brachini Journal: Ther Clin Risk Manag Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 2.423