Department of Surgery, Section of Acute Care Surgery, 10624Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, 137889University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Am Surg. 2022 Mar;88(3):429-433. doi: 10.1177/00031348211050591. Epub 2021 Nov 3.
Splenorrhaphy was once used to achieve splenic preservation in up to 40% of splenic injuries. With increasing use of nonoperative management and angioembolization, operative therapy is less common and splenic injuries treated operatively are usually high grade. Patients are often unstable, making splenic salvage unwise. Modern surgeons may no longer possess the knowledge to perform splenorrhaphy.
The records of adult trauma patients with splenic injuries from September 2014 to November 2018 at an urban level I trauma center were reviewed retrospectively. Data including American Association for the Surgery of Trauma splenic organ injury scale, type of intervention, splenorrhaphy technique, and need for delayed splenectomy were collected. This contemporary cohort (CC) was compared to a historical cohort (HC) of splenic injuries at a single center from 1980 to 1989 1990; 211: 369).
From 2014 to 2018, 717 adult patients had splenic injuries. Initial management included 157 (21.9%) emergent splenectomy, 158 (22.0%) angiogram ± embolization, 371 (51.7%) observation, and only 10 (1.4%) splenorrhaphy. The HC included a total of 553 splenic injuries, of which 313 (56.6%) underwent splenectomy, while splenorrhaphy was performed in 240 (43.4%). Those who underwent splenorrhaphy in each cohort (CC vs HC) were compared.
The success rate of splenorrhaphy has not changed. However, splenorrhaphy now involves only electrocautery with topical hemostatic agents and is used primarily in low-grade injuries. Suture repair and partial splenectomy seem to be "lost arts" in modern trauma care.
脾修补术曾用于保留多达 40%的脾损伤。随着非手术治疗和血管栓塞术的应用增加,手术治疗越来越少见,接受手术治疗的脾损伤通常为高级别损伤。患者通常不稳定,脾保留术并不明智。现代外科医生可能不再具备进行脾修补术的知识。
回顾性分析 2014 年 9 月至 2018 年 11 月在城市一级创伤中心治疗的成人创伤性脾损伤患者的记录。收集的数据包括美国外科创伤协会脾器官损伤分级、干预类型、脾修补术技术以及是否需要延迟脾切除术。该当代队列(CC)与 1980 年至 1989 年和 1990 年单一中心的历史队列(HC)进行比较(211:369)。
2014 年至 2018 年,共有 717 例成人脾损伤患者。初始治疗包括 157 例(21.9%)急诊脾切除术、158 例(22.0%)血管造影术+栓塞术、371 例(51.7%)观察治疗和仅 10 例(1.4%)脾修补术。HC 共包括 553 例脾损伤,其中 313 例(56.6%)行脾切除术,240 例(43.4%)行脾修补术。对每个队列(CC 与 HC)中接受脾修补术的患者进行了比较。
脾修补术的成功率没有变化。然而,脾修补术现在仅使用电凝和局部止血剂,主要用于低级别损伤。缝合修复和部分脾切除术似乎是现代创伤治疗中的“失传技艺”。