Gunn Andrew J, Raborn Joel R, Griffin Russell, Stephens Shannon W, Richman Joshua, Jansen Jan O
Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 619 19th St S, Birmingham, AL, 35249, USA.
Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 619 19th St S, Birmingham, AL, 35249, USA.
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 Jun;46(6):2823-2832. doi: 10.1007/s00261-020-02904-w. Epub 2021 Jan 2.
To evaluate the feasibility of enrolling patients in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing endovascular coils (EC) and vascular plugs (VP) for proximal splenic artery embolization (pSAE) in high-grade splenic trauma, and to collect data to inform the design of a larger clinical effectiveness trial.
Single-center, prospective, RCT of patients with Grade III-V splenic injuries selected for nonoperative management. Patients were randomized to pSAE with EC or VP. The main outcome was feasibility. We also evaluated technical success, time to stasis, complications, mortality, and splenectomy rates, by estimating rates and 95% confidence intervals.
46 of 50 eligible patients were enrolled (92%, 95% CI 90-100%). Overall, splenic salvage was 98% (45/46; 95% CI 94-100%). Primary technical success was observed in 22 EC patients (96%; 95% CI 87-100%) and 20 VP patients (87%; 95% CI 73-100%). Bayesian analysis suggests a > 80% probability that primary technical success is higher for EC. Two complications (one major and one minor) occurred in the EC group (9%; CI 0-20%) and one major complication occurred in the VP group (4%; CI 0-13%).
Randomized comparisons of endovascular devices used for pSAE after trauma are feasible. pSAE using either EC or VP results in excellent rates of splenic salvage in trauma patients with high-grade splenic injuries. These high rates of splenic salvage and low rates of complications make their use as a primary outcome in a future trial problematic. Consideration should be given to technical parameters as a primary outcome for future trials.
评估在一项随机对照试验(RCT)中纳入患者的可行性,该试验比较血管内栓塞弹簧圈(EC)和血管塞(VP)用于治疗重度脾外伤时近端脾动脉栓塞(pSAE)的效果,并收集数据以指导更大规模临床疗效试验的设计。
对入选非手术治疗的III - V级脾损伤患者进行单中心、前瞻性RCT。患者被随机分为接受EC或VP进行pSAE治疗。主要结局指标为可行性。我们还通过估计发生率和95%置信区间来评估技术成功率、止血时间、并发症、死亡率和脾切除率。
50例符合条件的患者中有46例入组(92%,95%CI 90 - 100%)。总体而言,脾保留率为98%(45/46;95%CI 94 - 100%)。22例接受EC治疗的患者实现了初次技术成功(96%;95%CI 87 - 100%),20例接受VP治疗的患者实现了初次技术成功(87%;95%CI 73 - 100%)。贝叶斯分析表明,EC的初次技术成功率更高的概率>80%。EC组发生了2例并发症(1例严重并发症和1例轻微并发症)(9%;CI 0 - 20%),VP组发生了1例严重并发症(4%;CI 0 - 13%)。
创伤后用于pSAE的血管内装置的随机比较是可行的。使用EC或VP进行pSAE在重度脾外伤患者中均能取得优异的脾保留率。这些高脾保留率和低并发症发生率使得将其作为未来试验的主要结局存在问题。未来试验应考虑将技术参数作为主要结局指标。