Suppr超能文献

预防性栓塞与观察治疗钝性脾损伤的高级别创伤:一项系统评价与荟萃分析

Prophylactic embolization vs observation for high-grade blunt trauma splenic injury: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

作者信息

Nann Silas, Clark Molly, Kovoor Joshua, Jog Shivangi, Aromataris Edoardo

机构信息

JBI, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

The Gold Coast University Hospital, Southport, Qld, Australia.

出版信息

JBI Evid Synth. 2025 Feb 1;23(2):208-243. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-24-00110. Epub 2024 Jul 19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of prophylactic angioembolization with observation as primary management strategies for patients with high-grade (grades 3-5) blunt trauma splenic injury.

INTRODUCTION

The spleen is commonly injured in abdominal trauma. Historical management practices involved splenectomy, but more recent evidence suggests an increased risk of severe infections and sepsis associated with this approach. Accordingly, nonoperative management strategies, including prophylactic splenic artery embolization and clinical observation, have gained prominence. This systematic review with meta-analysis directly compared angioembolization with clinical observation for high-grade splenic injuries only, aiming to provide clarity on this matter amid ongoing debates and variations in clinical practice.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review included adult patients aged 15 years or older with high-grade splenic injuries (grades 3-5) due to blunt trauma. Outcomes of interest include the need for further intervention (failure of management), mortality, complications, red blood cell transfusion requirements, hospital length of stay, and intensive care unit length of stay.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) was performed, with no restrictions on language or publication date. Gray literature was searched, including trial registries and relevant conference proceedings. After deduplication, 2 reviewers independently assessed titles and abstracts, and, subsequently, full-text articles for eligibility. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using standardized instruments from JBI. Data were extracted using predefined templates, and statistical meta-analysis was performed, where possible, using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using statistical methods, and potential publication bias was tested with a funnel plot. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in this review. Methodological quality assessment indicated some risk of bias in most studies, with concerns primarily related to differences in injury severity and potential confounding factors. Meta-analysis revealed that prophylactic angioembolization significantly reduced risk of management failure by 57% (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.68, I2 =53%, 15 studies) and decreased patient mortality by 37% (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93, I2 =0%, 9 studies) compared with clinical observation alone. There was a 47% reduction in risk of complications associated with prophylactic embolization compared with clinical observation (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.95, I2 =0%, 4 studies). Some statistical heterogeneity was observed, with I2 ranging from 0% to 53%. No significant differences were observed between the 2 management strategies for red blood cell transfusion requirements or hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review support the use of prophylactic embolization for high-grade blunt trauma splenic injuries, indicated by lower rates of management failure, reduced need for additional interventions, lower mortality, and fewer complications.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023420220.

摘要

目的

本系统评价的目的是比较预防性血管栓塞术与观察作为高级别(3 - 5级)钝性创伤性脾损伤患者主要治疗策略的有效性。

引言

脾脏在腹部创伤中常受损伤。以往的治疗方法主要是脾切除术,但最近的证据表明,这种方法会增加严重感染和败血症的风险。因此,包括预防性脾动脉栓塞术和临床观察在内的非手术治疗策略受到了关注。本系统评价及荟萃分析仅直接比较了高级别脾损伤的血管栓塞术与临床观察,旨在在当前临床实践中的争议和差异中阐明这一问题。

纳入标准

本评价纳入了年龄在15岁及以上、因钝性创伤导致高级别脾损伤(3 - 5级)的成年患者。感兴趣的结局包括进一步干预的必要性(治疗失败)、死亡率、并发症、红细胞输注需求、住院时间和重症监护病房住院时间。

方法

对PubMed、Embase和CINAHL(EBSCOhost)进行了全面检索,对语言和出版日期无限制。检索了灰色文献,包括试验注册库和相关会议记录。在去重后,两名 reviewers 独立评估标题和摘要,随后评估全文文章的 eligibility。使用JBI的标准化工具评估纳入研究的方法学质量。使用预定义模板提取数据,并在可能的情况下使用随机效应模型进行统计荟萃分析。使用统计方法评估异质性,并用漏斗图检验潜在的发表偏倚。采用推荐分级、评估、制定和评价(GRADE)方法评估证据的确定性。

结果

本评价纳入了16项研究。方法学质量评估表明,大多数研究存在一些偏倚风险,主要涉及损伤严重程度的差异和潜在混杂因素。荟萃分析显示,与单纯临床观察相比,预防性血管栓塞术显著降低了治疗失败风险57%(OR 0.43,95% CI 0.28 - 0.68,I² = 53%,15项研究),并降低了患者死亡率37%(OR 0.63,95% CI 0.43 - 0.93,I² = 0%,9项研究)。与临床观察相比,预防性栓塞术相关并发症风险降低了47%(OR 0.53,95% CI 0.29 - 0.95,I² = 0%,4项研究)。观察到一些统计异质性,I²范围为0%至53%。两种治疗策略在红细胞输注需求或住院时间方面未观察到显著差异。

结论

本评价结果支持对高级别钝性创伤性脾损伤使用预防性栓塞术,表现为治疗失败率较低、额外干预需求减少、死亡率降低和并发症减少。

评价注册

PROSPERO CRD42023420220

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