ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: To compare the outcomes of proximal (pSAE) versus distal (dSAE) splenic artery embolisation for management of focal distal arterial splenic injuries secondary to blunt splenic trauma. METHOD: Ethical approval was granted by the hospital research and ethics committee, Project 389/19. All patients who underwent splenic artery embolisation secondary to blunt abdominal trauma from 1 January 2009 to 1 January 2019 were reviewed. Patients with a tandem embolisation (both proximal and distal embolisations) or those with no acute vascular injury on angiography were excluded. Patient demographics, injury type/ AAST grade (2018 classification), technique of embolisation and outcomes were collected. Complications and splenectomy rates up to 30 days were recorded. RESULTS: 136 out of 232 patients had an embolisation performed for a distal vascular injury including active arterial bleeding, pseudoaneurysm or arteriovenous fistula. Mean age was 41 (range 16-84). Mean AAST grade was 4 (range 3-5). Mean Injury Severity Score was 22. pSAE was performed in 79.4% (n = 108) and dSAE in 20.6% (n = 28). Major complications occurred in 12 patients (pSAE n = 12, 11.1%; dSAE n = 0, P > 0.05); 6 pSAE required splenectomy (n = 6, 5.6%). There was no significant difference in outcomes between the two groups or when based on AAST grading. CONCLUSION: No significant difference was observed between proximal and distal embolisation techniques for blunt trauma patients with a distal vascular injury in terms of technical and clinical success.