Cargando…

Splenic trauma in the Northern Territory; the impact of an interventional radiology service on splenic trauma management and outcomes

BACKGROUND: The spleen is the most commonly injured organ in abdominal trauma. Guidelines suggest non-operative management (NOM) is preferred over splenectomy for all haemodynamically stable patients, regardless of injury severity. The availability of splenic angioembolization has been shown to impr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spittle, Ashleigh, Britcliffe, Alex, Hamilton, Mark Joh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10361010/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37484245
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16993
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The spleen is the most commonly injured organ in abdominal trauma. Guidelines suggest non-operative management (NOM) is preferred over splenectomy for all haemodynamically stable patients, regardless of injury severity. The availability of splenic angioembolization has been shown to improve outcomes for high-grade splenic injuries by decreasing failure rates of NOM. Trauma incidence and fatality rates are higher in regional and remote areas, and rurality is associated with increased mortality from trauma. Additionally, rural hospitals have difficulty with staff retention and may offer less specialist services compared with urban centres. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Royal Darwin Hospital, using the National Critical Care and Trauma Response Centre database. All patients with splenic injury admitted between January 2018 and December 2021 were selected, and divided into control and intervention cohorts, before and after January 1, 2020, correlating with interventional radiology availability. Demographic information included age, gender, mechanism of injury, AIS grade of splenic injury, injury severity score, and shock index. The primary outcome was management of splenic injury and failure rate of NOM. Secondary outcomes included mortality, ICU length of stay and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients met inclusion criteria, 32 controls and 34 interventions. Intervention and control groups were statistically similar for baseline demographics, and outcome measures of mortality and ICU length of stay. There was significant difference in the management of splenic injury, either OM or NOM, between intervention and control cohorts among high-grade splenic injury patients (AIS grade 4 and 5). In logistic regression analysis, the absence of interventional radiology was associated with increased OM (OR 12.8, SE 15.7, p = 0.04, 95%CI 1.15–142). CONCLUSION: The absence of an interventional radiology service was associated with an increased risk of operative management, suggesting interventional radiology helps to prevent splenectomy, improving long term outcomes for splenic trauma patients in regional settings. The effects of availability of IR seen in international publications on decreased mortality and shorter length of stay were not replicated in this study.