TY - JOUR
T1 - Follow-up strategies after non-operative treatment of traumatic splenic injuries
T2 - a systematic review
AU - Olsen, Amanda
AU - Possfelt-Møller, Emma
AU - Jensen, Lasse Rehné
AU - Taudorf, Mikkel
AU - Rudolph, Søren Steemann
AU - Preisler, Louise
AU - Penninga, Luit
N1 - © 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2024/10/21
Y1 - 2024/10/21
N2 - PURPOSE: Blunt trauma often results in splenic injuries, with non-operative management (NOM) being the preferred approach for stable patients. Following NOM, splenic vascular injuries, such as pseudoaneurysms, may arise, prompting radiological follow-up. However, a consensus on optimal radiological follow-up strategies is lacking. This systematic review evaluates existing evidence on radiological follow-up post-NOM for traumatic splenic injuries.METHODS: Conducting a systematic review following updated PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and trial registries from January 2010 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria covered studies on radiological follow-up for blunt splenic injuries.RESULTS: Out of 5794 studies, 17 were included involving 3392 patients. Various radiological modalities were used, with computed tomography (CT) being the most common. Vascular injuries occurred in 4.5% of patients, with most pseudoaneurysms diagnosed on day 2-6 post-trauma, and leading to intervention in 60% of these cases. Thirteen studies recommended routine follow-up, with six favouring CT, and seven supporting radiation-free modalities. Four studies proposed follow-up based on clinical indications, initial findings, or symptoms. Recommendations for specific timing of radiological follow-up ranged from 48 h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher.CONCLUSION: Limited high-quality evidence exists on radiological follow-up in isolated blunt splenic injuries, causing uncertainty in clinical practice. However, our review suggests a reasonable need for follow-up, with contrast-enhanced ultrasound emerging as a promising alternative to CT. Specific timing and criteria for follow-up remain unresolved, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies to address these knowledge gaps.
AB - PURPOSE: Blunt trauma often results in splenic injuries, with non-operative management (NOM) being the preferred approach for stable patients. Following NOM, splenic vascular injuries, such as pseudoaneurysms, may arise, prompting radiological follow-up. However, a consensus on optimal radiological follow-up strategies is lacking. This systematic review evaluates existing evidence on radiological follow-up post-NOM for traumatic splenic injuries.METHODS: Conducting a systematic review following updated PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and trial registries from January 2010 to March 2023. Inclusion criteria covered studies on radiological follow-up for blunt splenic injuries.RESULTS: Out of 5794 studies, 17 were included involving 3392 patients. Various radiological modalities were used, with computed tomography (CT) being the most common. Vascular injuries occurred in 4.5% of patients, with most pseudoaneurysms diagnosed on day 2-6 post-trauma, and leading to intervention in 60% of these cases. Thirteen studies recommended routine follow-up, with six favouring CT, and seven supporting radiation-free modalities. Four studies proposed follow-up based on clinical indications, initial findings, or symptoms. Recommendations for specific timing of radiological follow-up ranged from 48 h to seven days post-injury. Regarding AAST grading, nine studies recommended follow-up for injury grade III and higher.CONCLUSION: Limited high-quality evidence exists on radiological follow-up in isolated blunt splenic injuries, causing uncertainty in clinical practice. However, our review suggests a reasonable need for follow-up, with contrast-enhanced ultrasound emerging as a promising alternative to CT. Specific timing and criteria for follow-up remain unresolved, highlighting the need for high-quality prospective studies to address these knowledge gaps.
KW - Humans
KW - Spleen/injuries
KW - Wounds, Nonpenetrating/therapy
KW - Conservative Treatment
KW - Tomography, X-Ray Computed
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85207186115&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8
DO - 10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8
M3 - Review
C2 - 39432154
SN - 1435-2443
VL - 409
SP - 315
JO - Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
JF - Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
IS - 1
M1 - 315
ER -