Comparison of outcomes of proximal versus distal and combined splenic artery embolization in the management of blunt splenic injury: a report of 202 cases from a single trauma center

Background To compare the outcomes of blunt splenic injuries (BSI) managed with proximal (P) versus distal (D) versus combined (C) splenic artery embolization (SAE).Methods This retrospective study included patients with BSI who demonstrated vascular injuries on angiograms and were managed with SAE between 2001 and 2015. The success rate and major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification & GE; III) were compared between the P, D, and C embolizations.Results In total, 202 patients were enrolled (P, n = 64, 31.7%; D, n = 84, 41.6%; C, n = 54, 26.7%). The median injury severity score was 25. The median times from injury to SAE were 8.3, 7.0, and 6.6 h for the P, D, and C embolization, respectively. The overall haemostasis success rates were 92.6%, 93.8%, 88.1%, and 98.1% in the P, D, and C embolizations, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.079). Additionally, the outcomes were not significantly different between the different types of vascular injuries on angiograms or the materials used in the location of embolization. Splenic abscess occurred in six patients (P, n = 0; D, n = 5; C, n = 1), although it occurred more commonly in those who underwent D embolization with no significant difference (p = 0.092).Conclusions The success rate and major complications of SAE were not significantly different regardless of the location of embolization. The different types of vascular injuries on angiograms and agents used in different embolization locations also did not affect the outcomes.

Automated summary

This retrospective study compared the outcomes of proximal (P), distal (D), and combined (C) splenic artery embolization (SAE) for blunt splenic injuries (BSI), and found that the location of embolization had no significant impact on the success rate and major complications.