D.C. Olthof

Consensus strategies for the nonoperative management of patients with blunt splenic injury: A Delphi study

BACKGROUND Nonoperative management is the standard of care in hemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury. However, a number of issues regarding the management of these patients are still unresolved. The aim of this study was to reach consensus among experts concerning optimal treatment and follow-up strategies. METHODS The Delphi method was used to reach consensus among 30 expert trauma surgeons and interventional radiologists from around the world. An online survey was used in the two study rounds. Consensus was defined as an agreement of 80% or greater. RESULTS Response rates of the first and second rounds were 90% and 80%, respectively. Consensus was reached for 43% of the (sub)questions. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma organ injury scale for grading splenic injury is used by 93% of the experts. In hemodynamically stable patients, observation or splenic artery embolization (SAE) can be applied in the presence of a small or no hemoperitoneum combined with an intraparenchymal contrast extravasation or no contrast extravasation, regardless of the presence of an arteriovenous (AV) fistula/pseudoaneurysm. Hemodynamic instability is an indication for operative management, irrespective of computed tomographic characteristics and grade of splenic injury (≥82% of the experts). Operative management is also indicated in the presence of associated intra-abdominal injuries and/or the need for five or more packed red blood cell transfusions (22 of 27 experts, 82%). Recommended time span to start SAE in a stable patient with an intraparenchymal contrast extravasation is 60 minutes (19 of 24 experts). Patients should be admitted 1 to 3 days to a monitored setting (27 of 27 experts, 100%). Serial hemoglobin checks are performed by all experts, every 4 to 6 hours in the first 24 hours and once or twice a day after that (21 of 24 experts, 88%), in nonoperative management as well as after SAE. Routine postdischarge imaging is not indicated (21 of 24 experts, 88%). CONCLUSION Although treatment should always be adjusted to the specific patient, the results of this study may serve as general guidelines.

Prognostic factors for failure of nonoperative management in adults with blunt splenic injury: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND Contradictory findings are reported in the literature concerning prognostic factors for failure of nonoperative management (NOM) in the treatment of adults with blunt splenic injury. The objective of this systematic review was to identify prognostic factors for failure of NOM, with or without angiography and embolization. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies addressing failure of nonoperative treatment, with and/or without angiography and embolization, of blunt abdominal injuries were included. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed. RESULTS A total of 335 titles and abstracts were screened, of which 31 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No randomized controlled trials were found. Ten articles were qualified as high-quality articles and used for data extraction (best-evidence synthesis). A total of 25 prognostic factors were investigated, of which 14 were statistically significant in one or more studies. Strong evidence exists that age of 40 years or above, Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 25 or greater, and splenic injury grade of 3 or greater are prognostic factors for failure of NOM. Moderate evidence was found for a splenic Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3 or greater, trauma and ISS of less than 0.80, the presence of an intraparenchymal contrast blush, as well as transfusion of 1 unit of packed red blood cells or more. Limited evidence was found for large hemoperitoneum, lower Revised Trauma Score, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score, lower systolic blood pressure, male sex, the presence of traumatic brain injury, and splenic embolization as protective factor for failure of NOM. CONCLUSION Awareness for failure of NOM is required in patients aged 40 years or older, in patients with an ISS of 25 or higher or those with splenic injury grade 3 or higher. The prognostic factors for failure that we identified should be confirmed in future prospective cohort studies or meta-analyses using individual patient data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Systematic review, level III.

Changing patterns in diagnostic strategies and the treatment of blunt injury to solid abdominal organs.

BackgroundIn recent years there has been increasing interest shown in the nonoperative management (NOM) of blunt traumatic injury. The growing use of NOM for blunt abdominal organ injury has been made possible because of the progress made in the quality and availability of the multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scan and the development of minimally invasive intervention options such as angioembolization.AimThe purpose of this review is to describe the changes that have been made over the past decades in the management of blunt trauma to the liver, spleen and kidney.ResultsThe management of blunt abdominal injury has changed considerably. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examination has replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage as diagnostic modality in the primary survey. MDCT scanning with intravenous contrast is now the gold standard diagnostic modality in hemodynamically stable patients with intra-abdominal fluid detected with FAST. One of the current discussions in the literature is whether a whole body MDCT survey should be implemented in the primary survey.ConclusionsThe progress in imaging techniques has contributed to NOM being currently the treatment of choice for hemodynamically stable patients. Angioembolization can be used as an adjunct to NOM and has increased the success rate to 95%. However, to date many controversies exist about the optimum patient selection for NOM, the proper role of angioembolization in NOM, the best technique and material to use in angioembolization, and the right follow-up strategy of patients sustaining blunt abdominal injury. Conducting a well-designed prospective clinical trial or a Delphi study would be preferable.

Activation of sphingosine kinase by muscarinic receptors enhances NO-mediated and attenuates EDHF-mediated vasorelaxation.

Local formation of the sphingomyelin metabolite sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) within the vascular wall has been shown to modulate vascular reactivity. In this study we investigated whether sphingosine kinase, the enzyme responsible for S1P synthesis, plays a role in muscarinic receptor-mediated NO production and vascular relaxation in different blood vessel types. For this purpose, sphingosine kinase translocation and sphingolipid-dependent NO-production after muscarinic receptor stimulation were assessed in an endothelial cell line. Furthermore, we used the sphingosine kinase inhibitor N,N-dimethylsphingosine (DMS) to investigate the role of sphingosine kinase in the relaxant responses to the muscarinic agonist methacholine (MCh) in isolated rat aorta and mesenteric arteries. Activation of M3-receptors in an endothelial cell line induced a fast translocation of YFP-tagged sphingosine kinase-1 from the cytosol to the plasma membrane. Concomitant NO-production in this cell line was partially inhibited by DMS. Accordingly, in rat aorta the relaxant responses to MCh were attenuated in the presence of DMS, while the responses to the NO-donor sodium nitroprusside were unaltered. In contrast, DMS enhanced the relaxant responses to MCh in mesenteric artery preparations. This effect could also be observed in the presence of NO synthase and cyclooxygenase inhibitors, indicating that sphingosine kinase inhibition specifically enhanced endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor-mediated (i.e. non-NO and non-prostacyclin-dependent) relaxation. We conclude that sphingosine kinase differentially regulates vascular tone in different vessel types, enhancing NO-dependent vasorelaxation but counteracting EDHF-dependent vasorelaxation. This observation enhances our understanding of the complex mechanisms by which sphingolipids regulate vascular homeostasis. Moreover, a disturbed regulation of sphingolipid metabolism in the vascular wall may therefore play a role in the aetiology/pathology of disease states characterized by endothelial dysfunction.

Management of blunt renal injury in a level 1 trauma centre in view of the European guidelines

BACKGROUND Debate continues about the optimal management strategy for patients with renal injury. PURPOSE To report the diagnostics and treatment applied in a level 1 trauma centre and to compare it to the recommendations of the European Association of Urology guidelines concerning blunt renal injury. METHODS The management of all patients with blunt renal injury, admitted to the level 1 trauma centre of the Academic Medical Centre, between January 2005 and December 2009 was reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS Median age and ISS of the 186 included patients were 40 and 17 years respectively. All but one haemodynamically stable patients with microscopic haematuria received nonoperative management. Sixty percent of the haemodynamically stable patients with gross haematuria underwent CT scanning. Patients with grade 1-4 renal injury received nonoperative management. Additionally, two patients with grade 3-4 renal injury received angiography and embolization (A&E). One patient with grade 5 injury underwent renal exploration and two A&E. Seven of the 8 haemodynamically unstable patients underwent emergency laparotomy and in 2 patients, haemodynamically unstable because of renal injury, A&E was performed as an adjunct to surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS In the present study, violation of the guidelines increased with injury severity. A&E can provide both a useful adjunct to nonoperative management and alternative to surgical intervention in specialised centres with appropriate equipment and expertise, even in patients with high grade renal injury. We advocate an update of the guidelines with a more prominent role of A&E.

Time to intervention in patients with splenic injury in a Dutch level 1 trauma centre

BACKGROUND Timely intervention in patients with splenic injury is essential, since delay to treatment is associated with an increased risk of mortality. Transcatheter Arterial Embolisation (TAE) is increasingly used as an adjunct to non-operative management. The aim of this study was to report time intervals between admission to the trauma room and start of intervention (TAE or splenic surgery) in patients with splenic injury. METHODS Consecutive patients with splenic injury aged ≥ 16 years admitted between January 2006 and January 2012 were included. Data were reported according to haemodynamic status (stable versus unstable). In haemodynamically (HD) unstable patients, transfusion requirement, intervention-related complications and the need for a re-intervention were compared between the TAE and splenic surgery group. RESULTS The cohort consisted of 96 adults of whom 16 were HD unstable on admission. In HD stable patients, median time to intervention was 105 (IQR 77-188) min: 117 (IQR 78-233) min for TAE compared to 95 (IQR 69-188) for splenic surgery (p=0.58). In HD unstable patients, median time to intervention was 58 (IQR 41-99) min: 46 (IQR 27-107) min for TAE compared to 64 (IQR 45-80) min for splenic surgery (p=0.76). The median number of transfused packed red blood cells was 8 (3-22) in HD unstable patients treated with TAE versus 24 (9-55) in the surgery group (p=0.09). No intervention-related complications occurred in the TAE group and one in the splenic surgery group (p=0.88). Two spleen related re-interventions were performed in the TAE group versus 3 in the splenic surgery group (p=0.73). CONCLUSIONS Time to intervention did not differ significantly between HD unstable patients treated with TAE and patients treated with splenic surgery. Although no difference was observed with regard to intervention-related complications and the need for a re-intervention, a trend towards lower transfusion requirement was observed in patients treated with TAE compared to patients treated with splenic surgery. We conclude that if 24/7 interventional radiology facilities are available, TAE is not associated with time loss compared to splenic surgery, even in HD unstable patients.

Routine urinalysis in patients with a blunt abdominal trauma mechanism is not valuable to detect urogenital injury

Objective To investigate whether the routine performance of urinalysis in patients with a blunt trauma mechanism is still valuable. Methods Consecutive patients aged ≥16 years, admitted to a Dutch Level 1 trauma centre between January 2008 and August 2011, were included in this retrospective cohort study. Results of urinalysis (erythrocytes per µL) were divided into no, microscopic or macroscopic haematuria. Patients were divided into four groups based on whether a urinalysis was performed or not, with or without imaging for urogenital injury. Main outcome measures were the presence of urogenital injury and whether the findings on urine specimen and/or imaging led to clinical consequences. Results A total of 1815 patients were included. The prevalence of intra-abdominal and urogenital injuries was 13% and 8%, respectively. In 1363 patients (75%), urinalysis was performed and 1031 patients (57%) underwent imaging for urogenital injury as well. The presence of macroscopic haematuria (n=16) led to clinical consequences in 73% of the patients (11 out of 15), regardless of the findings on imaging. Microscopic haematuria on urinalysis in combination with no findings on imaging led to clinical consequences in 8 out of 212 patients (4%). Microscopic haematuria on urinalysis in patients who did not have imaging for urogenital injury did not lead to clinical consequences (0 out of 54 patients; 0%). All the 8 patients who underwent an intervention had positive findings on imaging. Conclusions The results do not support the routine performance of urinalysis in patients admitted with a blunt trauma mechanism. Although urinalysis could be valuable in specific patient populations, we should consider omitting this investigation as a routine part of the assessment of trauma patients.

A Dutch regional trauma registry: quality check of the registered data

Background Quality indicators have become increasingly important in the healthcare sector. Data from a trauma registry (TR) should be accurate and reliable as they are used to describe and evaluate (the quality of) trauma care. Objective To investigate the reliability of injury coding, injury severity scoring and survival status in a regional TR. The feasibility of the format that was developed for this study was also investigated. Methods A random sample, without replacement, was taken from the TR of a Dutch regional trauma care network. All 343 patients in the sample were then recoded by another trauma registrar (rater). Reliability was expressed in the percentage agreement between the raters. Results In the total study sample of 333 patients, the reliability of the number of Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes was substantial (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.70); and the reliability of the Injury Severity Score (ISS) (ICC=0.84) and survival status were ‘almost perfect’ (Cohens κ=0.82). Both raters had given 129 patients one AIS code. The reliability of the body region of the AIS was ‘almost perfect’ (Cohens κ=0.91); and the reliability of the severity of the injury and the ISS were ‘almost perfect’ (weighted κ=0.88 and ICC=0.90). The reliability of the ISS in the patients who were assigned at least two AIS codes (n=128) was ‘almost perfect’ (ICC=0.86). The reliability of the number of AIS codes and the number of body regions was ‘moderate’ (ICC=0.56 and Cohens κ=0.52). Conclusions The reliability of injury coding in a regional trauma registry was ‘substantial’ and the reliability of the ISS and survival status was ‘almost perfect’. The format and design of this study were feasible and could be used to investigate the quality of (trauma) registries.

Variation in treatment of blunt splenic injury in Dutch academic trauma centers

BACKGROUND The incidence of splenectomy after trauma is institutionally dependent and varies from 18% to as much as 40%. This is important because variation in management influences splenic salvage. The aim of this study was to investigate whether differences exist between Dutch level 1 trauma centers with respect to the treatment of these injuries, and if variation in treatment was related to splenic salvage, spleen-related reinterventions, and mortality. METHODS Consecutive adult patients who were admitted between January 2009 and December 2012 to five academic level 1 trauma centers were identified. Multinomial logistic regression was used to measure the influence of hospital on treatment strategy, controlling for hemodynamic instability on admission, high grade (American Association for the Surgery of Trauma 3-5) splenic injury, and injury severity score. Binary logistic regression was used to quantify differences among hospitals in splenic salvage rate. RESULTS A total of 253 patients were included: 149 (59%) were observed, 57 (23%) were treated with splenic artery embolization and 47 (19%) were operated. The observation rate was comparable in all hospitals. Splenic artery embolization and surgery rates varied from 9%-32% and 8%-28%, respectively. After adjustment, the odds of operative management were significantly higher in one hospital compared with the reference hospital (adjusted odds ratio 4.98 [1.02-24.44]). The odds of splenic salvage were significantly lower in another hospital compared with the reference hospital (adjusted odds ratio 0.20 [0.03-1.32]). CONCLUSIONS Although observation rates were comparable among the academic trauma centers, embolization and surgery rates varied. A nearly 5-fold increase in the odds of operative management was observed in one hospital, and another hospital had significantly lower odds of splenic salvage. The development of a national guideline is recommended to minimalize splenectomy after trauma.