Article

Hospital factors associated with splenectomy for splenic injury: a national perspective.

The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. USA.
The Journal of trauma (Impact Factor: 2.35). 12/2004; 57(5):1065-71. DOI: 10.1097/01.TA.0000103988.66443.0E
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The management of patients with splenic injury has shifted from routine splenectomy to attempts at splenic salvage. Using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's National Inpatient Sample (HCUP-NIS), we assessed the patterns of care for splenic trauma. We hypothesized that the processes of care in urban and rural hospitals would differ.
Generalized estimating equations were used to identify predictor variables associated with laparotomy and splenectomy from a national, population-based sample of inpatients (HCUP-NIS). Fourteen thousand nine hundred one patients with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification discharge diagnosis code of 865 were selected from the 1998 to 2000 HCUP-NIS data. Exclusion criteria included age greater than 80 years. Analyses were compared using all patients and excluding patients who died during the first 2 hospital days.
Eight thousand five hundred fifty-three patients were treated in urban teaching hospitals. Forty percent underwent a laparotomy and 28% underwent a splenectomy at that time. Another 4,461 patients were cared for in urban nonteaching hospitals. Of these, 46% had a laparotomy and 35% underwent a splenectomy. The remaining 1,887 patients were seen in rural hospitals. Forty-six percent had a laparotomy and 36% had a splenectomy. Patients in urban teaching hospitals had lower risk-adjusted odds of splenectomy in multivariate models controlling for confounders including overall injury severity. Overall splenic salvage increased from 1998 to 2000, primarily because of increased salvage rates among urban teaching hospitals.
The management of patients with splenic injury differs among urban teaching, urban nonteaching, and rural hospitals. Surgeons at urban teaching hospitals appear more willing to attempt splenic salvage by means of nonoperative management.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
70 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of non-operative management (NOM) for blunt splenic trauma (BST) is to preserve the spleen. The advantages of NOM for minor splenic trauma have been extensively reported, whereas its value for the more severe splenic injuries is still debated. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the available published evidence on NOM in patients with splenic trauma and to compare it with the operative management (OM) in terms of mortality, morbidity and duration of hospital stay. For this systematic review we followed the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" statement. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed from January 2000 to December 2011, without language restrictions, for studies that compared NOM vs. OM for splenic trauma injuries. Only studies involving at least 10 patients with BST were included. We identified 21 non randomized studies: 1 Clinical Controlled Trial and 20 retrospective cohort studies analyzing a total of 16,940 patients with BST. NOM represents the gold standard treatment for minor splenic trauma and is associated with decreased mortality in severe splenic trauma (4.78% vs. 13.5% in NOM and OM, respectively). This is in line with what is reported in the literature. Of note, in BST treated operatively, other injuries accounted for the higher mortality. In addition, it was not possible to determine post-treatment morbidity in major splenic trauma. The definition of hemodynamic stability varied greatly in the literature depending on the surgeon and the trauma team, representing a further bias. Moreover, data on the remaining analyzed outcomes (hospital stay, number of blood transfusions, abdominal abscesses, overwhelming post-splenectomy infection) were not reported in all included studies or were not comparable, precluding the possibility to perform a meaningful cumulative analysis and comparison. NOM of BST, preserving the spleen, is the treatment of choice for the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grades I and II. Conclusions are more difficult to outline for higher grades of splenic injury, because of the substantial heterogeneity of expertise among different hospitals, and potentially inappropriate comparison groups.
    Critical care (London, England) 09/2013; 17(5):R185. · 4.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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.
    Journal of Surgical Research 09/2014; · 2.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Das nicht-operative Management (NOM) des stumpfen Milztraumas hat sich in den vergangenen Jahren als Therapiekonzept etabliert. Es bestehen jedoch zahlreiche Kontroversen bezüglich der Überwachung und Nachsorge dieser Patienten. Ziel dieser Studie war es, mittels einer Umfrage bei Mitgliedern der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Allgemeine und Unfallchirurgie (SGAUC) die aktuelle Praxis bezüglich NOM beim isolierten Milztrauma zu erfassen und mögliche Diskrepanzen zur aktuellen Literatur zu eruieren. Studiendesign und Untersuchungsmethode Sämtliche praktizierende Mitglieder der SGAUC wurden mittels schriftlichem Umfragebogen adressiert. Dieser enthielt Fragen zu Person und Klinik des Chirurgen, Fragen zu Diagnostik und Management während der Hospitalisation sowie zu radiologischen Verlaufskontrollen und zur stufenweisen Wiederaufnahme von Alltagsaktivitäten. Ergebnisse An der Umfrage nahmen 52 von 165 (31,5%) praktizierenden Mitgliedern der SGAUC teil. Diese deckten 62,8% aller Schweizer Traumazentren ab. Vierzehn Befragte (26,9%) verfügen an ihrer Klinik über ein Protokoll zur Behandlung des Milztraumas. Als initiale Bildgebung beim hämodynamisch stabilen Patienten mit stumpfem Abdomaninaltrauma gaben 82,7% der Befragten die Sonographie an. Bei sonographischem Verdacht auf Milztrauma verzichteten allerdings 19,2% der Befragten auf eine weitergehende Diagnostik. Die Hälfte der Chirurgen gab außerdem an, bei sichtbarem Kontrastmittelextravasat aus der Milz keine weiteren therapeutischen Maßnahmen einzuleiten. 86,5% der Befragten würden Patienten mit niedriggradigem Milztrauma für durchschnittlich 1,6 (0–4 Tage) in einem kontinuierlich-monitorisierten Bett überwachen. Keine Unterschiede wurden hinsichtlich der Aktivitätsrestriktion zwischen mittel- und hochgradigen Milztraumata gemacht. Schlussfolgerung Aufgrund eines Mangels an evidenzbasierten Richtlinien zum NOM des Milztraumas gibt es eine beträchtliche Variabilität in der klinischen Praxis selbst unter erfahrenen Chirurgen. Die größten Diskrepanzen zu den Empfehlungen in der aktuellen Literatur waren zum einen der Verzicht auf eine Computertomographie bei Verdacht auf Milztrauma, zum anderen das konservative Vorgehen trotz nachgewiesenem Kontrastmittelaustritt.
    Der Unfallchirurg · 0.64 Impact Factor