Impact of Endovascular Stenting on Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Subclavian Artery Injury.

BACKGROUND

Traumatic subclavian artery injury (SAI) remains uncommon but can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Although open and endovascular repair offer excellent limb salvage rates, their role in blunt and penetrating injuries is not well defined. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of mechanism of injury and type of repair on outcomes in patients with traumatic SAI.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients undergoing procedures for traumatic SAI were identified from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, severity of injury and shock, type of subclavian repair (open vs endovascular), morbidity, and mortality were recorded. Patients with SAI were stratified by mechanism and type of repair and compared. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

Seven hundred thirty-seven patients undergoing procedures for SAI were identified. Of these, 39% were penetrating. The majority were male (80%) with a median age and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 37 and 21, respectively. 58% of patients were managed endovascularly. For patients with blunt injury, the type of repair affected neither morbidity (25% vs 19%, p = 0.116) nor mortality (11% vs 10%, p = 0.70). For patients with penetrating injuries, endovascular repair had significantly lower morbidity (12% vs 22%, p = 0.028) and mortality (6% vs 21%, p = 0.001). MLR identified endovascular repair as the only modifiable risk factor associated with reduced mortality (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.87, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

SAI results in significant morbidity and mortality regardless of mechanism. Although the type of repair did not affect mortality in patients with blunt injury, endovascular repair was identified as the only modifiable predictor of reduced mortality in patients with penetrating injuries.