H Jesani1, L Jesani1, A Rangaraj2, A Rasheed1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, UK. 2. Department of Radiology, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to study radiological assessment, management and outcome of traumatic splenic injury over 15 years in a UK district general hospital. METHOD: A retrospective database was established including all splenic injury cases from June 2002 to June 2017 by searching the clinical electronic database. We searched the radiological database for computed tomography reported phrases 'spleen injury', 'laceration', 'haematoma', 'trauma'. We interrogated theatre records for operations coded as splenectomy and cross-referenced this with pathology. Records were reviewed for demographics, vital observations, documentation of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grading of splenic injury, subsequent management and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 126 patients identified with traumatic splenic injury, with male to female ratio three to one. Operative management was undertaken in 54/126 (43%) patients and selective non-operative management in the remaining. Splenic artery embolisation was undertaken in 5/126 (4%) and 2/126 underwent splenorrhaphy. Computed tomography was undertaken in 109/126 (87%) patients and AAST grading was reported in 18 (17%) patients. AAST grade reporting did not improve significantly when comparing the first 7.5 years with the latter (2/30, 7%; 16/79, 20%), respectively; p = 0.09). Selective non-operative management increased significantly over the studied period (14/34, 42%; 58/93, 62%; p = 0.04). The overall hospital mortality was 10.3%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: AAST grade reporting of splenic injury has remained sub-optimal over 15 years. Despite progression towards selective non-operative management, operative intervention remained unacceptably high, with splenectomy being the main therapeutic modality. Standardisation through an integrated multidisciplinary diagnostic and management pathway offers the optimal strategy to reduce trauma-induced splenectomy.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to study radiological assessment, management and outcome of traumatic splenic injury over 15 years in a UK district general hospital. METHOD: A retrospective database was established including all splenic injury cases from June 2002 to June 2017 by searching the clinical electronic database. We searched the radiological database for computed tomography reported phrases 'spleen injury', 'laceration', 'haematoma', 'trauma'. We interrogated theatre records for operations coded as splenectomy and cross-referenced this with pathology. Records were reviewed for demographics, vital observations, documentation of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grading of splenic injury, subsequent management and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 126 patients identified with traumatic splenic injury, with male to female ratio three to one. Operative management was undertaken in 54/126 (43%) patients and selective non-operative management in the remaining. Splenic artery embolisation was undertaken in 5/126 (4%) and 2/126 underwent splenorrhaphy. Computed tomography was undertaken in 109/126 (87%) patients and AAST grading was reported in 18 (17%) patients. AAST grade reporting did not improve significantly when comparing the first 7.5 years with the latter (2/30, 7%; 16/79, 20%), respectively; p = 0.09). Selective non-operative management increased significantly over the studied period (14/34, 42%; 58/93, 62%; p = 0.04). The overall hospital mortality was 10.3%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: AAST grade reporting of splenic injury has remained sub-optimal over 15 years. Despite progression towards selective non-operative management, operative intervention remained unacceptably high, with splenectomy being the main therapeutic modality. Standardisation through an integrated multidisciplinary diagnostic and management pathway offers the optimal strategy to reduce trauma-induced splenectomy.
Authors: Burke E Thompson; Burke T Thompson; Felipe Munera; Stephen M Cohn; Alexandra A MacLean; John Cameron; Luis Rivas; David Bajayo Journal: J Trauma Date: 2006-05
Authors: Indermeet Singh Bhullar; Eric R Frykberg; Joseph J Tepas; Daniel Siragusa; Todd Loper; Andrew J Kerwin Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Jennifer W Uyeda; Christina A LeBedis; David R Penn; Jorge A Soto; Stephan W Anderson Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Stephan W Anderson; Jose C Varghese; Brian C Lucey; Peter A Burke; Erwin F Hirsch; Jorge A Soto Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-02-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alexis R Boscak; Kathirkamanathan Shanmuganathan; Stuart E Mirvis; Thorsten R Fleiter; Lisa A Miller; Clint W Sliker; Scott D Steenburg; Melvin Alexander Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: D C Olthof; C H van der Vlies; M J Scheerder; R J de Haan; L F M Beenen; J C Goslings; O M van Delden Journal: Injury Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 2.586