A pseudo-dilemma: Are we over-diagnosing and over-treating traumatic splenic intraparenchymal pseudoaneurysms?

BACKGROUND: Splenic embolization for traumatic vascular abnormalities in stable patients is a common practice. We hypothesize that modern contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) over diagnoses posttraumatic splenic vascular lesions, such as intraparenchymal pseudoaneurysms (PSA) that may not require embolization. METHODS: We reviewed the experience at our high-volume center with endovascular management of blunt splenic injuries from January 2016 to December 2021. Multidisciplinary review was used to compared initial CT findings with subsequent angiography, analyzing management and outcomes of identified vascular lesions. RESULTS: Of 853 splenic injuries managed overall during the study period, 255 (29.9%) underwent angiography of the spleen at any point during hospitalization. Vascular lesions were identified on 58% of initial CTs; extravasation (12.2%) and PSA (51.0%). Angiography was performed a mean of 22 hours after admission, with 38% done within 6 hours. Embolization was performed for 90.5% (231) of patients. Among the 130 patients with PSA on initial CT, 36 (27.7%) had no visible lesion on subsequent angiogram. From the 125 individuals who did not have a PSA identified on their initial CT, 67 (54%) had a PSA seen on subsequent angiography. On postembolization CT at 48 hours to 72 hours, persistently perfused splenic PSAs were seen in 41.0% (48/117) of those with and 22.2% (2/9) without embolization. Only one of 24 (4.1%) patients with PSA on angiography observed without embolization required delayed splenectomy, whereas 6.9% (16/231) in the embolized group had splenectomy at a mean of 5.5 ± 4 days after admission. CONCLUSION: There is a high rate of discordance between CT and angiographic identification of splenic PSAs. Even when identified at angiogram and embolized, close to half will remain perfused on follow-up imaging. These findings question the use of routine angioembolization for all splenic PSAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Near Disappearance of Splenorrhaphy as an Operative Strategy for Splenic Preservation After Trauma.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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 (Ann Surg 1990; 211: 369). RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.