Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Los Angeles General Medical Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Aug 1;7(8):e2425300. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.25300.
The spleen is often removed in laparotomy after traumatic abdominal injury, with little effort made to preserve the spleen.
To explore the association of surgical management (splenic repair vs splenectomy) with outcomes in patients with traumatic splenic injuries undergoing laparotomy and to determine whether splenic repair is associated with lower mortality compared with splenectomy.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a trauma registry-based cohort study using the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from January 2013 to December 2019. Participants included adult patients with severe splenic injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] grades 3-5) undergoing laparotomy after traumatic injury within 6 hours of admission. Data analysis was performed from April to August 2023.
Splenic repair vs splenectomy in patients with severe traumatic splenic injury.
The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Outcomes were compared using different statistical approaches, including 1:1 exact matching with consecutive conditional logistic regression analysis as the primary analysis and multivariable logistic regression, propensity score matching, and inverse-probability weighting as sensitivity analyses.
A total of 11 247 patients (median [IQR] age, 35 [24-52] years; 8179 men [72.7%]) with a severe traumatic splenic injury undergoing laparotomy were identified. Of these, 10 820 patients (96.2%) underwent splenectomy, and 427 (3.8%) underwent splenic repair. Among patients who underwent an initial splenic salvage procedure, 23 (5.3%) required a splenectomy during the subsequent hospital stay; 400 patients with splenic preservation were matched with 400 patients who underwent splenectomy (matched for age, sex, hypotension, trauma mechanism, AIS spleen grade, and AIS groups [0-2, 3, and 4-5] for head, face, neck, thorax, spine, and lower and upper extremity). Mortality was significantly lower in the splenic repair group vs the splenectomy group (26 patients [6.5%] vs 51 patients [12.8%]). The association of splenic repair with lower mortality was subsequently verified by conditional regression analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9; P = .03). Multivariable logistic regression, propensity score matching, and inverse-probability weighting confirmed this association.
In this retrospective cohort study, splenic repair was independently associated with lower mortality compared with splenectomy during laparotomy after traumatic splenic injury. These findings suggest that efforts to preserve the spleen might be indicated in selected cases of severe splenic injuries.
在创伤性腹部损伤后剖腹术中,通常会切除脾脏,很少努力保留脾脏。
探讨手术处理(脾修补术与脾切除术)与剖腹术治疗创伤性脾损伤患者结局的关系,并确定脾修补术是否与脾切除术相比死亡率更低。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项基于创伤登记的队列研究,使用美国外科医师学会创伤质量改进计划数据库,时间范围为 2013 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月。参与者包括入院后 6 小时内因创伤接受剖腹术的严重脾损伤(损伤严重程度评分[Abbreviated Injury Scale,AIS] 3-5 级)的成年患者。数据分析于 2023 年 4 月至 8 月进行。
严重创伤性脾损伤患者的脾修补术与脾切除术。
主要结局为院内死亡率。使用不同的统计方法比较结局,包括 1:1 精确匹配的连续条件逻辑回归分析作为主要分析方法,以及多变量逻辑回归、倾向评分匹配和逆概率加权作为敏感性分析。
共确定了 11247 名(中位数[IQR]年龄,35 [24-52] 岁;8179 名男性[72.7%])接受剖腹术治疗的严重创伤性脾损伤患者。其中,10820 名患者(96.2%)行脾切除术,427 名(3.8%)行脾修补术。在接受初始脾保留手术的患者中,23 名(5.3%)在随后的住院期间需要脾切除术;400 名保留脾脏的患者与 400 名接受脾切除术的患者进行了匹配(匹配年龄、性别、低血压、创伤机制、AIS 脾脏分级和 AIS 头、面、颈、胸、脊柱和下和上肢的[0-2、3 和 4-5]组)。脾修补组的死亡率明显低于脾切除术组(26 名患者[6.5%] vs 51 名患者[12.8%])。条件回归分析随后证实了脾修补术与较低死亡率之间的关联(调整后的优势比,0.4;95%CI,0.2-0.9;P = .03)。多变量逻辑回归、倾向评分匹配和逆概率加权证实了这种关联。
在这项回顾性队列研究中,与剖腹术治疗创伤性脾损伤后的脾切除术相比,脾修补术与较低的死亡率独立相关。这些发现表明,在某些严重脾损伤的情况下,努力保留脾脏可能是有指征的。