• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

成人创伤中心对美国小儿外科学会关于钝性脾损伤处理指南的遵循情况。

The adherence of adult trauma centers to American Pediatric Surgical Association guidelines on management of blunt splenic injuries.

机构信息

Division of Pediatric Surgery, John R. Oishei Children's Hospital, Buffalo, NY.

Division of Pediatric Surgery, John R. Oishei Children's Hospital, Buffalo, NY.

出版信息

J Pediatr Surg. 2020 Sep;55(9):1748-1753. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.01.001. Epub 2020 Jan 16.

DOI:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.01.001
PMID:32035594
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Nonoperative management (NOM) is commonly utilized in hemodynamically stable children with blunt splenic injuries (BSI). Guidelines published by the American Pediatric Surgical Association over the past 15 years support this approach. We sought to determine the rates and outcomes of NOM in pediatric BSI and compare trends between pediatric (PTC), mixed (MTC) and adult trauma centers (ATC).

METHODS

This was a retrospective database analysis of the NTDB data from 2011 to 2015 including pediatric patients with BSI, as described by ICD-9-CM Codes 865.00-865.09. Patients with head injuries with AIS > 2, multiple intraabdominal injuries, and transfers-out were excluded. According to ACS and/or state designation, trauma facilities were defined as PTC (level I/II pediatric only), MTC (level I/II adult and pediatric) and ATC (level I/II adult only). OM group was defined as presence of procedure codes reflecting exploratory laparotomy/laparoscopy and/or any splenic procedures. NOM group consisted of patients who were observed, transfused or had transarterial embolization (TAE). Variables analyzed were age, ISS, spleen AIS, amount and type of blood products transfused, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital (H) length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

5323 children met the inclusion criteria. 11.4% received care at PTC (NOM, 97%), 40.7% at MTC (NOM, 89.9%) and 47.8% at ATC (NOM, 83.8%) (P < 0.001). In NOM group, PTC patients had the highest spleen AIS (3.46 ± 0.95, P < 0.001). TAE was predominantly used at MTC and ATC (P = 0.001). MTC and ATC were more likely to transfuse than PTC (P = 0.002). MTC and ATC OM rates were lower in children aged ≤12 than in children aged >12 (P < 0.001). Splenectomy rate was 1.5% at PTC, 8.4% at MTC, and 14.4% at ATC (P < 0.001). In OM group, PTC patients had a higher ISS (P = 0.018) and spleen AIS (P = 0.048) than both MTC and ATC. The proportion of patients treated by NOM at ATC increased during the 5-year period studied (P = 0.015). Treatment at MTC or ATC increased the risk for OM by 3.89 and 5.36 times respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PTCs still outperform ATCs in NOM success rates despite higher ISS and splenic injury grades. From 2011 to 2015, ATC OM rates dropped from 17% to 12.4% suggesting increased adoption of the APSA guidelines. Further educational initiatives may help augment this trend.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective.

摘要

背景

在血流动力学稳定的钝性脾损伤(BSI)患儿中,通常采用非手术治疗(NOM)。过去 15 年来,美国儿外科协会发布的指南支持这种方法。我们旨在确定儿科 BSI 中 NOM 的发生率和结果,并比较儿科(PTC)、混合(MTC)和成人创伤中心(ATC)之间的趋势。

方法

这是对 2011 年至 2015 年 NTDB 数据的回顾性数据库分析,包括 ICD-9-CM 代码 865.00-865.09 描述的脾损伤患儿。排除头部损伤 AIS>2、多发腹内损伤和转出的患者。根据 ACS 和/或州指定,创伤机构被定义为 PTC(仅限 I/II 级儿科)、MTC(I/II 级成人和儿科)和 ATC(仅限 I/II 级成人)。OM 组定义为存在反映剖腹探查/腹腔镜和/或任何脾脏手术的程序代码。NOM 组包括接受观察、输血或接受经动脉栓塞(TAE)的患者。分析的变量包括年龄、ISS、脾脏 AIS、输血量和血制品类型,以及重症监护病房(ICU)和医院(H)的住院时间(LOS)。

结果

5323 名儿童符合纳入标准。11.4%在 PTC 接受治疗(NOM,97%),40.7%在 MTC(NOM,89.9%)和 47.8%在 ATC(NOM,83.8%)(P<0.001)。在 NOM 组中,PTC 患者的脾脏 AIS 最高(3.46±0.95,P<0.001)。TAE 主要在 MTC 和 ATC 中使用(P=0.001)。MTC 和 ATC 比 PTC 更有可能输血(P=0.002)。≤12 岁儿童的 MTC 和 ATC 开放手术率低于>12 岁儿童(P<0.001)。PTC 的脾切除术率为 1.5%,MTC 为 8.4%,ATC 为 14.4%(P<0.001)。在 OM 组中,PTC 患者的 ISS(P=0.018)和脾脏 AIS(P=0.048)均高于 MTC 和 ATC。在研究期间,ATC 中采用 NOM 治疗的患者比例增加(P=0.015)。在 MTC 或 ATC 治疗会使 OM 的风险分别增加 3.89 和 5.36 倍(P<0.001)。

结论

尽管 ISS 和脾脏损伤程度较高,PTC 在 NOM 成功率方面仍优于 ATC。从 2011 年到 2015 年,ATC 的 OM 率从 17%下降到 12.4%,表明 APSA 指南的采用率有所增加。进一步的教育举措可能有助于增加这一趋势。

证据水平

II 型研究:回顾性。

相似文献

1
The adherence of adult trauma centers to American Pediatric Surgical Association guidelines on management of blunt splenic injuries.成人创伤中心对美国小儿外科学会关于钝性脾损伤处理指南的遵循情况。
J Pediatr Surg. 2020 Sep;55(9):1748-1753. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.01.001. Epub 2020 Jan 16.
2
Persistent disparities between trauma center types in the management of children with high-grade blunt splenic injuries.创伤中心类型在儿童高级别钝性脾损伤管理方面存在持续差异。
World J Surg. 2024 Mar;48(3):568-573. doi: 10.1002/wjs.12072. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
3
Trauma center variation in the management of pediatric patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injury: a national trauma data bank analysis.小儿钝性腹部实性器官损伤患者管理中的创伤中心差异:一项国家创伤数据库分析
J Pediatr Surg. 2016 Mar;51(3):499-502. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.08.012. Epub 2015 Aug 28.
4
Benchmarks for splenectomy in pediatric trauma: how are we doing?小儿创伤脾切除术的基准:我们做得如何?
J Pediatr Surg. 2015 Feb;50(2):339-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.09.001. Epub 2014 Dec 5.
5
Variation in the management of adolescent patients with blunt abdominal solid organ injury between adult versus pediatric trauma centers: an analysis of a statewide trauma database.成人与儿科创伤中心在处理青少年钝性腹部实体器官损伤患者方面的管理差异:对全州创伤数据库的分析。
J Surg Res. 2013 Aug;183(2):808-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2013.02.050. Epub 2013 Mar 16.
6
Nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma in the elderly: does age play a role?老年人钝性脾外伤的非手术治疗:年龄起作用吗?
Am Surg. 2007 Jun;73(6):585-9; discussion 590.
7
Splenic artery embolization improves outcomes and decreases the length of stay in hemodynamically stable blunt splenic injuries - A level 1 Australian Trauma centre experience.脾动脉栓塞术改善血流动力学稳定的钝性脾损伤的转归并缩短住院时间 - 澳大利亚 1 级创伤中心的经验。
Injury. 2022 May;53(5):1620-1626. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.12.043. Epub 2021 Dec 26.
8
Recent Changes in the Management of High-Grade Blunt Pancreatic Injury in Children: A Nationwide Trend Analysis.儿童严重钝性胰腺损伤管理的近期变化:全国趋势分析。
J Am Coll Surg. 2024 Jun 1;238(6):1106-1114. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000001033. Epub 2024 Feb 7.
9
Changing patterns of treatment for blunt splenic injuries: an 11-year experience in a rural state.钝性脾损伤治疗模式的变化:一个农业州的11年经验
J Pediatr Surg. 2000 Jun;35(6):985-8; discussion 988-9. doi: 10.1053/jpsu.2000.6948.
10
Pediatric trauma center verification improves quality of care and reduces resource utilization in blunt splenic injury.儿科创伤中心认证可提高钝性脾损伤的护理质量并减少资源利用。
J Pediatr Surg. 2019 Jan;54(1):155-159. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.10.004. Epub 2018 Oct 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Management of complex pediatric and adolescent liver trauma: adult vs pediatric level 1 trauma centers.复杂儿科和青少年肝外伤的处理:成人和儿科 1 级创伤中心。
Pediatr Surg Int. 2024 Apr 7;40(1):100. doi: 10.1007/s00383-024-05673-5.
2
Pediatric vs Adult or Mixed Trauma Centers in Children Admitted to Hospitals Following Trauma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.创伤后收治于医院的儿童在儿科与成人或混合创伤中心治疗的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Sep 5;6(9):e2334266. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.34266.
3
Analysis of the efficacy and safety of conservative treatment of blunt abdominal trauma in children: retrospective study. Conservative treatment of blunt abdominal trauma in children.
分析儿童钝性腹部创伤保守治疗的效果和安全性:回顾性研究。儿童钝性腹部创伤的保守治疗。
Rev Col Bras Cir. 2023 Mar 27;50:e20233429. doi: 10.1590/0100-6991e-20233429-en. eCollection 2023.
4
Implementation of an evidence-based accelerated pathway: can hospital length of stay for children with blunt solid organ injury be safely decreased?基于证据的加速通道的实施:能否安全缩短儿童钝性实体器官损伤的住院时间?
Pediatr Surg Int. 2021 Jun;37(6):695-704. doi: 10.1007/s00383-021-04896-0. Epub 2021 Mar 29.