Suppr超能文献

创伤性脾损伤的非手术治疗:脾动脉近端栓塞术有作用吗?

Nonoperative management of traumatic splenic injuries: is there a role for proximal splenic artery embolization?

作者信息

Bessoud Bertrand, Denys Alban, Calmes Jean-Marie, Madoff David, Qanadli Salah, Schnyder Pierre, Doenz Francesco

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Bicêtre Hospital, 78 rue du Général Leclerc, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre 94270, France.

出版信息

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Mar;186(3):779-85. doi: 10.2214/AJR.04.1800.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to evaluate our experience with transcatheter proximal (i.e., main) splenic artery embolization (TPSAE) in the nonsurgical management of patients with grade III-V splenic injuries, according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) guidelines, and patients with splenic injuries associated with CT evidence of active contrast extravasation or blush (or cases meeting both criteria).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The records of patients with traumatic splenic injuries admitted during a 52-month period were retrospectively reviewed for patient age and sex, mechanism of injury, injury severity score (ISS), RBC transfusion requirements, AAST splenic injury CT grade, presence of active contrast extravasation or blush on CT examination, and amount of hemoperitoneum on CT examination. Demographics, CT findings, transfusion requirements, and outcome were compared using the Student's t test or chi-square test in patients undergoing standard nonoperative management and nonoperative management TPSAE-that is, TPSAE followed by nonoperative management.

RESULTS

Of the 79 identified patients with splenic trauma, 67 were managed nonoperatively. Thirty-seven patients (28 men, nine women; mean age, 40 years; mean ISS, 28.8) underwent nonoperative management TPSAE and 30 patients (27 men, three women; mean age, 37 years; mean ISS, 25.1) underwent nonoperative management. Age, sex, and ISS were not significantly different between the two groups. TPSAE was always technically feasible. Splenic injuries were significantly more severe in the nonoperative management TPSAE group than in the nonoperative management group with respect to the mean splenic injury AAST CT grade (3.7 vs 2, respectively; p < 0.0001), active contrast extravasation or blush (38% [14/37] vs 3% [1/30], respectively; p = 0.0005), and hemoperitoneum grade (1.6 vs 0.8, respectively; p = 0.0006). Secondary splenectomy rate was lower in the nonoperative management TPSAE group (2.7% [1/37] vs 10% [3/30]). No procedure-related complications were encountered during early and delayed clinical follow-up.

CONCLUSION

TPSAE is a feasible and safe adjunct to observation in the nonoperative management of severe traumatic splenic injuries. The secondary splenectomy rate using nonoperative management TPSAE (2.7%) is among the lowest reported despite a selection of severe injuries.

摘要

目的

我们研究的目的是根据美国创伤外科协会(AAST)的指南,评估经导管近端(即主要)脾动脉栓塞术(TPSAE)在非手术治疗III - V级脾损伤患者以及伴有CT证据显示有活动性造影剂外渗或造影剂浓聚(或符合这两个标准的病例)的脾损伤患者中的应用经验。

材料与方法

回顾性分析52个月期间收治的创伤性脾损伤患者的病历,记录患者的年龄、性别、损伤机制、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、红细胞输血需求、AAST脾损伤CT分级、CT检查时有无活动性造影剂外渗或造影剂浓聚以及CT检查时的腹腔积血情况。对接受标准非手术治疗和非手术治疗加TPSAE(即TPSAE后进行非手术治疗)的患者的人口统计学数据、CT检查结果、输血需求和治疗结果,采用Student's t检验或卡方检验进行比较。

结果

在79例确诊的脾外伤患者中,67例接受了非手术治疗。37例患者(28例男性,9例女性;平均年龄40岁;平均ISS为28.8)接受了非手术治疗加TPSAE,30例患者(27例男性,3例女性;平均年龄37岁;平均ISS为25.1)接受了单纯非手术治疗。两组患者的年龄、性别和ISS无显著差异。TPSAE在技术上总是可行的。在平均脾损伤AAST CT分级方面(分别为3.7和2;p < 0.0001)、活动性造影剂外渗或造影剂浓聚方面(分别为38%[14/37]和3%[1/30];p = 0.0005)以及腹腔积血分级方面(分别为1.6和0.8;p = 0.0006),非手术治疗加TPSAE组的脾损伤明显比单纯非手术治疗组更严重。非手术治疗加TPSAE组的二次脾切除率较低(2.7%[1/37]比10%[3/30])。在早期和延迟的临床随访期间未出现与手术相关的并发症。

结论

TPSAE是严重创伤性脾损伤非手术治疗中一种可行且安全的辅助观察方法。尽管选择的是严重损伤病例,但采用非手术治疗加TPSAE的二次脾切除率(2.7%)是报道中最低的之一。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验