Brillantino A, Iacobellis F, Robustelli U, Villamaina E, Maglione F, Colletti O, De Palma M, Paladino F, Noschese G
Emergency Department, "A. Cardarelli" Hospital, Via A. Cardarelli 9, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Department of Radiology, Second University of Naples, Piazza Miraglia 2, 80138, Naples, Italy.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2016 Oct;42(5):593-598. doi: 10.1007/s00068-015-0575-z. Epub 2015 Sep 28.
The advantages of the conservative approach for major spleen injuries are still debated. This study was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of NOM in the treatment of minor (grade I-II according with the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma; AAST) and severe (AAST grade III-V) blunt splenic trauma, following a standardized treatment protocol.
All the hemodynamically stable patients with computer tomography (CT) diagnosis of blunt splenic trauma underwent NOM, which included strict clinical and laboratory observation, 48-72 h contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) follow-up and splenic angioembolization, performed both in patients with admission CT evidence of vascular injuries and in patients with falling hematocrit during observation.
87 patients [32 (36.7 %) women and 55 (63.2 %) men, median age 34 (range 14-68)] were included. Of these, 28 patients (32.1 %) had grade I, 22 patients (25.2 %) grade II, 20 patients (22.9 %) grade III, 11 patients (12.6 %) grade IV and 6 patients (6.8 %) grade V injuries. The overall success rate of NOM was 95.4 % (82/87). There was no significant difference in the success rate between the patients with different splenic injuries grade. Of 24 patients that had undergone angioembolization, 22 (91.6 %) showed high splenic injury grade. The success rate of embolization was 91.6 % (22/24). No major complications were observed. The minor complications (2 pleural effusions, 1 pancreatic fistula and 2 splenic abscesses) were successfully treated by EAUS or CT guided drainage.
The non operative management of blunt splenic trauma, according to our protocol, represents a safe and effective treatment for both minor and severe injuries, achieving an overall success rate of 95 %. The angiographic study could be indicated both in patients with CT evidence of vascular injuries and in patients with high-grade splenic injuries, regardless of CT findings.
对于严重脾损伤采用保守治疗的优势仍存在争议。本研究旨在按照标准化治疗方案,评估非手术治疗(NOM)在治疗轻度(根据美国创伤外科学会[AAST]分级为I-II级)和重度(AAST III-V级)钝性脾外伤中的安全性和有效性。
所有经计算机断层扫描(CT)诊断为钝性脾外伤且血流动力学稳定的患者均接受NOM,包括严格的临床和实验室观察、48-72小时的对比增强超声(CEUS)随访以及脾血管栓塞术,对于入院CT有血管损伤证据的患者以及观察期间血细胞比容下降的患者均进行脾血管栓塞术。
纳入87例患者[32例(36.7%)女性和55例(63.2%)男性,中位年龄34岁(范围14-68岁)]。其中,28例患者(32.1%)为I级损伤,22例患者(25.2%)为II级损伤,20例患者(22.9%)为III级损伤,11例患者(12.6%)为IV级损伤,6例患者(6.8%)为V级损伤。NOM的总体成功率为95.4%(82/87)。不同脾损伤分级患者的成功率无显著差异。在接受血管栓塞术的24例患者中,22例(91.6%)为高分级脾损伤。栓塞成功率为91.6%(22/24)。未观察到严重并发症。轻微并发症(2例胸腔积液、1例胰瘘和2例脾脓肿)通过超声引导下穿刺引流或CT引导下引流成功治疗。
根据我们的方案,钝性脾外伤的非手术治疗对于轻度和重度损伤均是一种安全有效的治疗方法,总体成功率达95%。无论CT检查结果如何,对于有CT血管损伤证据的患者以及高分级脾损伤患者均可考虑进行血管造影检查。