Management of blunt splenic injury in patients with concurrent infectious mononucleosis

Selective nonoperative management is appropriate for most blunt splenic injuries in adults and children, but the efficacy of this approach is unknown when injury occurs in patients with concurrent infectious mononucleosis. We have reviewed our experience during the past 23 years with the selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in these patients. Medical record review identified nine patients with blunt splenic injury and infectious mononucleosis from 1978 to 2001, representing 3.3 per cent of our total trauma population with blunt splenic injury treated during that interval. Two patients underwent immediate splenectomy because of hemodynamic instability. Seven patients were admitted with the intent to treat nonoperatively. Five patients were successfully managed nonoperatively. Two patients failed nonoperative management and underwent splenectomy, one because of hemodynamic instability and one because of an infected splenic hematoma. Concurrent infectious mononucleosis does not preclude the successful nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury. This small subset of patients may be managed nonoperatively using the same criteria as for patients whose splenic injuries are not complicated by infectious mononucleosis.     

Changing patterns in the management of splenic trauma: the impact of nonoperative management.

OBJECTIVE: The recognition that splenectomy renders patients susceptible to lifelong risks of septic complications has led to routine attempts at splenic conservation after trauma. In 1990, the authors reported that over an 11-year study period involving 193 patients, splenorrhaphy was the most common splenic salvage method (66% overall) noted, with nonoperative management employed in only 13% of blunt splenic injuries. This report describes changing patterns of therapy in 190 consecutive patients with splenic injuries seen during a subsequent 6-year period (1990 to 1996). An algorithmic approach for patient management and pitfalls to be avoided to ensure safe nonoperative management are detailed. METHODS: Nonoperative management criteria included hemodynamic stability and computed tomographic examination without shattered spleen or other injuries requiring celiotomy. RESULTS: Of 190 consecutive patients, 102 (54%) were managed nonoperatively: 96 (65%) of 147 patients with blunt splenic injuries, which included 15 patients with intrinsic splenic pathology, and 6 hemodynamically stable patients with isolated stab wounds (24% of all splenic stab wounds). Fifty-six patients underwent splenectomy (29%) and 32 splenorrhaphy (17%). The mean transfusion requirement was 6 units for splenectomy survivors and 0.8 units for nonoperative therapy (85% received no transfusions). Fifteen of the 16 major infectious complications that occurred followed splenectomy. Two patients failed nonoperative therapy (2%) and underwent splenectomy, and one patient required splenectomy after partial splenic resection. There no missed enteric injuries in patients managed nonoperatively. The overall mortality rate was 5.2%, with no deaths following nonoperative management. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries has replaced splenorrhaphy as the most common method of splenic conservation. The criteria have been extended to include patients previously excluded from this form of therapy. As a result, 65% of all blunt splenic injuries and select stab wounds can be managed with minimal transfusions, morbidity, or mortality, with a success rate of 98%. Splenectomy, when necessary, continues to be associated with excessive transfusion and an inordinately high postoperative sepsis rate.     

Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults 55 years and older: a twenty-year experience

The nonoperative management of splenic injury secondary to blunt trauma in older patients remains controversial. We have reviewed our experience from January 1978 to December 1997 with selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults 55 years and older. Criteria for nonoperative management included hemodynamic stability with any transient hypotension corrected using less than 2,000 cm3 crystalloid infusion, a negative abdominal physical examination ruling out associated injuries, and a blood transfusion requirement of no more than 2 units attributable to the splenic injury. During the study period, 18 patients over age 55 with radiographic confirmation of a splenic injury met the above criteria for nonoperative management. Their mean age was 72 years (range 56-86), and 13 of the 18 were female (72%). The mean Injury Severity Score was 15 (range 4-29), with the mechanism of injury equally divided between automobile crashes (9) and falls (9). During a similar time period, 15 patients 55 years or older with splenic injury composed an operative group; these patients did not differ with respect to age (mean 68 years), sex (60% female), or mechanism of injury. CT scans of 8 patients managed nonoperatively were available and graded using the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification, with a mean score of 2.3 (range 2-3). Eight of the 18 nonsurgical patients received blood transfusions. None of the 18 patients who met the criteria for nonoperative management "failed" the protocol, and none were taken to the operating room for abdominal exploration. Two patients (11%) died of associated thoracic injuries after lengthy hospital stays, one at 10 days and one at 24 days. We conclude from our data that nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in patients age 55 years and older is indicated provided they are hemodynamically stable, do not require significant blood transfusion, and have no other associated abdominal injuries.     

Prospective evaluation of criteria for the nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma

Recent reports have shown an increased mortality associated with the nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury. We have prospectively applied criteria developed from our previous 15-year experience for the nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt splenic injury. These criteria consist of 1) hemodynamic stability on admission or after initial resuscitation with up to two liters of crystalloid infusion, 2) no physical findings or any associated injuries necessitating laparotomy, and 3) a transfusion requirement attributable to the splenic injury of 2 units or less. From 1994 through 2000 a total of 99 patients presented with blunt splenic injury. Thirty-one patients (31%) underwent splenectomy secondary to hemodynamic instability. During the observation period eight of the 68 patients (12%) who initially met criteria for NOM developed hemodynamic instability and underwent splenectomy. All NOM failures occurred within 72 hours of admission. There was no mortality associated with splenic injury in the NOM (Group I) or in the group failing NOM (Group II), and no associated morbidities from the splenic injury were seen in either group. No significant differences were seen between Groups I and II in terms of age, gender, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, admitting systolic blood pressure, admitting hemoglobin, transfusion requirements, intensive care unit length of stay, or total hospital length of stay (all P > 0.200). We conclude that established criteria for intervention and careful observation in an intensive care setting for at least 72 hours will minimize morbidity or mortality associated with blunt splenic injury in adults.     

Selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma in adults

The use of selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma in adults is based on the undeniable benefits of this approach in children. Proper patient selection requires hemodynamic stability, lack of generalized peritoneal irritation, and minimal blood transfusion needs. Computed tomography is now used to make the diagnosis, but the decision for laparotomy is based on clinical grounds. Forty-one (87%) of 47 patients selected for nonoperative management were treated successfully without laparotomy, while the remaining 6 patients underwent delayed operations for persistent splenic bleeding. Blood transfusion requirements were significantly less in the observed group than in the operative group for patients with isolated trauma and for patients with polytrauma. There were no known missed intra-abdominal injuries and no deaths with the nonoperative approach. Analysis of our results has confirmed that nonoperative management is a safe and effective alternative to immediate laparotomy in properly selected patients and it can result in splenic salvage without the need for an operation.     

Factors affecting the outcome of patients with splenic trauma

This is a report of 546 consecutive patients with penetrating and blunt splenic trauma seen over a 17 1/2-year period (1980-1997). The etiology of the splenic injuries and the associated mortality rates were: blunt injuries 45 of 298 (15%), gunshot wounds 48 of 199 (24%), and stab wounds four of 49 (8%). The overall mortality rate was 97 of 546 (18%). The most significant risk factors for death were all associated with major blood loss: transfusion requirements > or = 6 units of blood, low initial operating room blood pressure, associated abdominal vascular injuries, and performance of a thoracotomy. The two most important organs injured in conjunction with the spleen that were significant predictors of postoperative infectious complications were colon and pancreas. The need for splenectomy was most significantly correlated with higher grades of splenic injury especially grades IV and V. The evolution in management of blunt splenic trauma has led to a significant improvement in splenic preservation and avoidance of laparotomy for many patients. Operative splenic salvage is reduced in patients subjected to laparotomy who are candidates for nonoperative treatment. Improved results with splenic injury should be obtained by rapid control of bleeding. This may require more liberal criterial in selecting patients with splenic trauma for early operative treatment.     

Pediatric splenic injuries with a contrast blush: successful nonoperative management without angiography and embolization

Background

The presence of a contrast blush on computed tomography (CT) in adult splenic trauma is a risk factor for failure of nonoperative management. Arterial embolization is believed to reduce this failure rate. The significance of a blush in pediatric trauma is unknown. The authors evaluated the outcome of children with blunt splenic trauma and contrast extravasation.

Methods

The trauma registry was queried for all pediatric patients with blunt splenic injuries. Admission CT was reviewed for injury grade and presence of an arterial blush by a radiologist blinded to patient outcome. Hospital and office charts were reviewed for success of nonoperative management, late splenic rupture, and other complications.

Results

One hundred seven children with blunt splenic trauma were identified over a 6-year period. Mean injury grade was 2.9. Six patients required emergency splenectomy. An additional 7 patients met hemodynamic criteria for surgical intervention (3 splenectomies, 4 splenorrhaphies). Admission CT was available in 63 patients. An arterial blush was identified in 5 (9.7%). Four remained stable and were treated conservatively. One underwent splenectomy for hemodynamic instability. There were no cases of delayed splenic rupture, failed nonoperative treatment, or long-term complications.

Conclusions

Contrast blush in children with blunt splenic trauma is rare, and its presence alone does not appear to predict delayed rupture or failure of nonoperative treatment. Based on this limited series, splenic artery embolization does not have a place in the management of splenic injuries in children.     

Nonoperative management of blunt splenic and hepatic trauma in the pediatric population: significant differences between adult and pediatric surgeons?

Although operative management was the preferred method of treating blunt abdominal trauma in the past, recent literature and practice recommend a nonsurgical approach to most pediatric splenic and hepatic injuries. The majority of data supporting the safety and efficacy of this nonoperative approach are derived from university trauma programs with a pediatric center where care was managed by pediatric surgeons only. To evaluate the applicability of this approach in a regional trauma center where pediatric patients are managed by pediatric and non-pediatric surgeons we reviewed the experience at a Level II community trauma center. Fifty-four children (16 years of age or less) were admitted between April 1992 and April 1998 after sustaining blunt traumatic splenic and/or hepatic injuries. There were 37 (69%) males and 17 (31%) females; the average age was 11 years (range 4 months to 16 years). Of the 54 patients 34 (63%) sustained splenic injuries, 17 (31%) sustained hepatic injuries, and three (6%) sustained both splenic and hepatic injuries. All of these injuries were diagnosed by CT scan or during laparotomy. The average Injury Severity Score was 14.9 with a range from four to 57. Of the 47 patients initially admitted for nonoperative management one patient failed nonoperative management and required operative intervention. In our study 98 per cent (46 of 47 patients) of pediatric patients were successfully managed nonoperatively. Complications of nonoperative management occurred in two patients. Both developed splenic pseudocysts after splenic injury, which required later operative repair. These data are comparable with those from university trauma programs and confirm that nonoperative management is safe in a community trauma center. The majority of children with blunt splenic and hepatic trauma can be successfully treated without surgery, in a regional trauma center treated by nonpediatric trauma surgeons, if the decision is based on careful initial evaluation, aggressive resuscitation, and close observation of their hemodynamic stability.     

Risk factors for splenectomy in children with blunt splenic trauma

Background/Purpose: Nonoperative management and splenic preservation have become standards of care for management of pediatric blunt splenic trauma. However, review of the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study (PTOS) registry found that 15% of children with blunt splenic injury still underwent splenectomy. The authors sought to determine the factors that predisposed to splenectomy in this population. Methods: Between 1993 and 1997, 754 children, ages 0 to 16 years, who sustained blunt splenic trauma were entered in the PTOS database. These patients were stratified into groups according to the mode of management: nonoperative, splenorrhaphy, or splenectomy. Logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with splenectomy. Results: Overall, 15.1% of patients underwent splenectomy, 7.4% underwent splenorrhaphy, and 77.5% were treated nonoperatively. Spleen injury grade, nonspleen abdominal injuries, Glasgow Coma Scale 3 to 8, and age 15 to 16 years were significant determinants of splenectomy by multivariate analysis. Children treated at pediatric trauma centers (PTC) underwent significantly fewer splenectomies. Conclusions: Injury grade, but not hemodynamic instability, was a significant independent determinant of splenectomy in children with blunt splenic trauma. Children treated at PTC are less likely to undergo splenectomy. Ongoing analysis of the management of blunt pediatric splenic injury and reduction of unnecessary splenectomies are needed to optimize care for injured children.     

Twenty Years of Splenic Preservation in Trauma: Lower Early Infection Rate Than in Splenectomy

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies concerning the operative preservation and nonoperative management of splenic injuries in patients with splenic trauma have been published; however, few studies have analyzed prospectively the results and early complication rates of a defined management in splenic injury. METHODS: From 1986 to 2006, adult patients with blunt splenic injuries were evaluated prospectively with the intent of splenic preservation. Hemodynamically unstable patients underwent laparotomy. Stable patients were treated conservatively regardless of the grade of splenic injury determined by ultrasound and/or CT scan. RESULTS: During a 20-year period, 155 patients were prospectively evaluated. In 98 patients (63%), the spleen could be preserved by nonoperative (64 patients, 65%) or operative (34 patients, 35%) treatment and 57 patients (37%) needed splenectomy. There were no differences in age, sex, or trauma score between the groups, but a higher early infection rate in patients with splenectomy compared with patients with splenic preservation (p < 0.005) was observed, even if the patients were matched with respect to multiple trauma using the Injury Severity Score (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Splenic preservation in patients with blunt splenic injury by operative or nonoperative treatment leads to lower early infection rates in adults and, therefore, should be advocated.     

Concomitant blunt enteric injuries with injuries of the liver and spleen: a dilemma for trauma surgeons

Prompt identification of enteric injuries after blunt trauma remains problematic. With the increased utilization of nonoperative management of blunt abdominal trauma gastrointestinal disruptions may escape timely detection and repair. The purpose of this study was to evaluate blunt enteric injuries requiring operative repair in adult patients and the association of concomitant hepatic and/or splenic injuries. Over a 10-year period (January 1990 through December 1999) 1648 patients suffered blunt liver, spleen, and/or enteric injuries, with 87 (5.3%) of these requiring operative repairs of the enteric injury. These patients had enteric injury only (EI) (60.9%; 53 of 87), concomitant enteric/splenic injury (ESI) (10.3%; 9 of 87), concomitant enteric/hepatic injury (EHI) (13.8%; 12 of 87), and enteric/hepatic/splenic injury (EHSI) 14.9% (13 of 87). A delay in treatment of >8 hours from presentation of EI compared with either EHI or ESI was not significantly different between the two groups. EHSI had exploratory laparotomy more expeditiously related to hemodynamic instability. Mortality rates were higher with EHI related to hemorrhagic shock and/or severe traumatic brain injury. Morbidity was not related to a delay in diagnosis until the period of delay was greater than 24 hours. The nonoperative management of blunt solid organ injury does not delay the detection and treatment of concomitant bowel injuries compared with isolated blunt enteric injuries. Occult enteric injury with solid organ injury has a low incidence and represents a continuing challenge to the clinical acumen of the trauma surgeon.     

Blunt splenic trauma.

The treatment of blunt splenic injury has evolved over time from splenectomy in all patients to nonoperative management in stable patients with operation reserved for failures of NOM. While rates of OPSI remain low in trauma patients, splenic salvage in stable patients should be attempted. However, clinical evidence of ongoing blood loss or instability should be addressed with prompt splenectomy. Careful patient selection is of paramount importance in nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury.     

The role of follow-up radiographic studies in nonoperative management of spleen trauma

The management of splenic injuries has evolved significantly in recent years from an operative to a nonoperative approach in stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. The management of these patients with serial radiographic studies before hospital discharge remains controversial. We reviewed the management of 90 patients retrospectively who were admitted to our Level II trauma center with splenic injuries secondary to blunt trauma to determine the value of serial radiographic studies. Forty-seven (52%) patients underwent immediate laparotomy. Forty-three (48%) patients were managed conservatively without surgery. All nonoperative patients had an initial CT of the abdomen to evaluate their abdominal injuries. Among the 43 patients managed without surgery 31 had no follow-up radiographic studies. Twelve patients had follow-up studies before discharge. Two of these 12 patients subsequently underwent splenectomy. Both had developed hypotension, tachycardia, and a decreasing hematocrit, which prompted their repeat radiographic studies. Ten patients had no change in their clinical status and showed no significant change in the radiographic injury pattern to the spleen. One patient who was initially managed nonoperatively became hemodynamically unstable with increasing abdominal pain and subsequently underwent splenectomy without follow-up radiographic studies. The remaining 30 patients who had no follow-up studies had no significant change in their clinical abdominal examinations and had no further complications from their splenic injuries. Routine follow-up radiographic evaluations are not necessary in the nonoperative management of stable patients with splenic injuries.     

Failure of observation of blunt splenic injury in adults: variability in practice and adverse consequences

BACKGROUND: The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multiinstitutional Workgroup reported a failure rate for nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults of 10.8%. Sixty percent of the failures occurred within 24 hours of admission. The purpose of this multiinstitutional study by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma was to determine common variables in failure of nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults. STUDY DESIGN: Medical records were reviewed in a blinded fashion on 78 patients in whom nonoperative management failed. Statistical analysis was performed with ANOVA, extended chi-square, and Fisher's exact test; statistical significance was p<0.05. RESULTS: The 78 patients were categorized based on hemodynamic status. Forty-four percent were stable; 31% had transient hypotension or tachycardia that resolved with fluid infusion (responders); and 25% were unstable. Two-thirds of the unstable patients required laparotomy within 12 hours of admission; all had laparotomy within 72 hours. Mortality was significantly different when comparing the unstable to the stable and responder groups: stable (3%), responders (8%), and unstable (37%), despite similar age and only modest differences in Injury Severity Score. Eight CT scans were misinterpreted initially. Of 26 Focused Abdominal Sonography for Trauma (FAST) studies, 11 (42.3%) were false negative. Abnormal abdominal findings were noted in 67.7% of patients on admission. Ten patients died (12.8%). Sixty percent of the deaths were caused largely by delayed treatment of splenic or other abdominal injuries; one patient died in the responder group and five unstable patients died. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty percent to 40% of the patients who had unsuccessful nonoperative management in this study were selected inappropriately, with hemodynamic instability or initial misinterpretation of diagnostic studies. As a consequence, the majority of the deaths were from delayed treatment of intraabdominal injuries. This article suggests that written protocols, better adherence to sound clinical judgment, and experienced and timely interpretation of radiologic studies would reduce the incidence of failure of nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in adults.     

Nonoperative management of splenic trauma. Conservative or radical treatment?

In a four-year experience with selective nonoperative management of splenic trauma in adults and children, 24 (35%) of 68 patients with documented splenic trauma were initially treated nonoperatively. In only one patient was an operation and laparotomy ultimately required. There was no morbidity or mortality in the nonoperative group. In the operative group (44 patients), 4% died after operation, largely of multiple injuries. Confirmation of splenic injury and follow-up of patients were mostly performed by splenic scintiscans. There was no significant difference in length of hospitalization between operative and nonoperative groups. Operative splenic repair and preservation of the spleen to prevent postsplenectomy sepsis often requires considerable experience and may be a lengthy, tedious procedure. Nonoperative therapy in adults and children is an attractive alternative in a selective group of patients.     

Pediatric Splenic Injury: Nonoperative Management First!

Abstract Background and Purpose:  In the past splenectomy was the standard procedure for traumatic blunt splenic injury, when bleeding of the spleen occurred. Since the spleen performs important immunological functions the advantage of a spleen-saving approach is preservation of immunological functions. Especially in the pediatric population splenic preservation is an important objective. Spleen-saving treatment, in particular selective nonoperative management, has gained ground in the past 20 years. An 18-year retrospective review was performed to evaluate our cumulative experience with nonoperative management. Endpoints: hemodynamical instability and splenectomy. Methods:  Forty-six patients were identified. Demographics, methods of management, mechanism of injury, injury grade, associated injuries, hemodynamical parameters, bloodtransfusion, complications, ICU and hospital stay were documented and analyzed to determine statistical significance between modes of management. Results:  Initially, 34 patients were managed nonoperatively, while 12 patients underwent laparotomy – with 7 (58.3% of the operative group) of these having splenectomy performed. Three patients (out of 34) failed nonoperative management and required delayed splenorraphy or splenectomy, a 91.2% (3 out of 34 failed) success rate for intended nonoperative management versus 85.7% for intended splenorraphy (1 out of 7 failed). Thus, overall rates of 67.4% nonoperative management and 82.6% splenic conservation were achieved. Analysis of parameters between treatments showed significant differences between nonoperative management and splenorraphy for splenic injury grade II and IV. Conclusion:  We recommend based on our data on children with splenic injury grades II and IV that the standard treatment for children aged 0 to 18 years due to blunt abdominal trauma should be nonoperative management. However management of blunt splenic injury remains a clinical decision, for this reason does not preclude on CT-scan grade V for nonoperative management.     

Nonoperative management of pediatric blunt hepatic trauma

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of operative versus nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma in children including transfusion practices. We reviewed the experience at our American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma center with pediatric commitment over a 5-year period. Children < or = 16 years of age suffering blunt liver injury as documented on admission CT scan were included in the study. Liver injuries identified on CT scan were classified according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma's Organ Injury Scaling system. All data are presented as mean +/- standard error. One case of pediatric liver trauma not identified on CT was excluded (prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Twenty-seven patients were included [age 9.3 +/- 1.0 years (range 3-16)]. Mechanisms of injury included motor vehicle crash (14), pedestrian struck by motor vehicle (7), bicycle crash (4), fall from height (1), and pedestrian struck by falling object (1). Trauma Score was 11.5 +/- 0.3. Distribution of Liver Injury Grade was as follows: grade I, 13; grade II, 9; grade III, 3; grade IV, 2; and grade V, 0. All five patients who underwent operative management had multiple organ injuries; three had concomitant splenic injury requiring operative repair; the remaining two had small bowel injury requiring repair. Hepatorrhaphy did not correlate with severity of liver injury: grade I, n = 1; II, n = 2; III, n = 1; and IV, n = 1. Three operated patients received blood transfusions. Twenty-two patients were managed with nonoperative treatment, of these only one required blood transfusion. No patients in the study died, three were transferred to subacute rehabilitation, one was transferred to another hospital, and 23 were discharged home. Our findings indicate that a majority of children with blunt hepatic injury as documented on CT scan can be managed with nonoperative treatment, and few require blood transfusions. Patients with multiple organ injury including simultaneous splenic injury are likely ideally managed through operative exploration and repair, whereas those with isolated liver injuries can be successfully managed nonoperatively.     

Splenic artery embolization: Have we gone too far?

BACKGROUND: Splenic artery angioembolization (EMBO) has been promoted to increase the success rate of nonoperative management of splenic injuries. Our institutional clinical pathway calls for EMBO in the setting of ongoing splenic bleeding or contrast blush on computed tomography scan. We perceived a higher rate of failure than that reported in the literature. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with splenic EMBO to identify predictors of failure of nonoperative/EMBO management. METHODS: The trauma registry and interventional radiology database of a Level I trauma center were reviewed for patients with splenic injuries from January 2000 through June 2004. Charts and films of patients undergoing EMBO were reviewed. RESULTS: There were 221 patients admitted with blunt splenic injuries. Of these, 165 (75%) were selected for nonoperative management; 41 (25%) of them underwent splenic EMBO. Of the 41, 11 patients (27%) failed nonoperative/EMBO management. Of nine patients with low-grade injury (I, II) and small or no hemoperitoneum, none failed EMBO, whereas 10 of 23 (43%) with high-grade injury (III, IV, V) and moderate or large hemoperitoneum failed. EMBO was more likely to fail if extravasation was seen on angiography (59% vs. 4%). Coils (vs. particles) and main (vs. selective) artery EMBO were more often successful. Of EMBO patients who experienced transient hypotension, 57% required splenectomy. CONCLUSIONS: EMBO may have salvaged many spleens, but splenectomy was required in 27% of EMBO patients. Patient selection is critical to successful management. Any hypotension in the face of a contrast blush probably warrants laparotomy. The combination of high grade injury and significant hemoperitoneum, or extravasation on angiogram, predict a high risk of failure and thus warrant a low threshold for splenectomy if bleeding persists. Technical EMBO considerations may impact success, but this requires further investigation.     

Nonoperative management of adult blunt splenic trauma. Criteria for successful outcome.

Nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma in adults is controversial despite numerous reports advocating this mode of therapy. Blunt splenic trauma is frequently managed without operation at our institution and, to define criteria that may predict a successful outcome, a retrospective review (1980 to 1988) of all adult splenic injuries was undertaken. Splenic injuries were documented by scintillation studies, CAT scanning, or at laparotomy. Sixty of 252 (24%) splenic injuries were initially treated without operation, which included bed rest, ICU monitoring, frequent physical exams, nasogastric tube, serial hematocrits, and follow-up splenic imaging. Five patients (5 of 60) failed nonoperative management and required interval laparotomy. Reasons for failure included blood loss greater than four units, enlarging splenic defect, or increasing peritoneal signs. Parameters predicting a successful outcome were localized trauma to the left flank or abdomen, hemodynamic stability, transfusion requirements less than four units, rapid return of GI function, age less than 60 years, and early resolution of splenic defects on imaging studies. No morbidity or deaths resulted from delayed operative intervention. In carefully selected adult patients, blunt splenic trauma may be successfully managed without operation.     

Gunshot injuries to the liver: the role of selective nonoperative management

BACKGROUND: Selective nonoperative management of blunt liver injuries has become standard practice in most trauma centers. We evaluated the role of selective nonoperative management of gunshot wounds to the liver. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of gunshot wounds to the liver treated in a level I trauma center. Patients with peritoneal signs or hemodynamic instability were operated on without delay. Patients with a soft, nontender abdomen and no signs of heavy bleeding were selected for nonoperative management. Liver injury was diagnosed by CT scan. If peritonitis or signs of substantial internal bleeding developed, an operation was performed; otherwise the patient was discharged within a few days of admission. Analysis was restricted to the group of patients with isolated liver injuries. RESULTS: During a 42-month period, 928 patients were admitted with abdominal gunshot injuries, 152 of whom (16%) had a liver injury. In 52 patients (34% of all liver injuries), the liver was the only injured intraabdominal organ (4 patients had associated kidney or splenic injuries that did not require surgical repair). Thirty-six of the patients (69%) with isolated liver injuries had an emergent operation because of signs of peritonitis or hemodynamic instability. The remaining 16 patients (31%) were selected for nonoperative management (3 patients had associated right kidney injury). Five patients in the observed group required delayed operation because of development of signs of peritonitis (4 patients) or abdominal compartment syndrome (1 patient). The remaining 11 patients (7% of all liver injuries or 21% of isolated liver injuries) were managed successfully without operation. One patient with delayed operation developed multiple complications from abdominal compartment syndrome, and 1 patient in the nonoperative group had a biloma, which was treated with percutaneous drainage. CONCLUSIONS: Selected patients with isolated grades I and II gunshot wounds to the liver can be managed nonoperatively.