Search

Seventy-five adults with splenic injury were evaluated prospectively over 45 months to examine the possibility of splenic preservation. Haemodynamically unstable patients underwent surgery with the intent of splenic preservation. Stable patients received non-operative treatment regardless of the grade of splenic injury determined by ultrasonography and computed tomography. Thirty-seven patients required splenectomy and in 38 the organ was preserved (20 operative preservation, 18 non-operative treatment). Of 22 patients initially receiving non-operative treatment, there were four secondary haemorrhages after 7, 7, 10 and 13 days making surgery necessary. Three of these patients underwent splenectomy and in one the spleen was preserved by partial resection. After splenectomy four patients required reoperation because of rebleeding or for evacuation of a haematoma. Patients who had undergone splenectomy had a significantly increased infection rate (P < 0.005) compared with those in whom the spleen was preserved, even when patients were matched with respect to multiple trauma using the Injury Severity Score (P < 0.01).

The haematological and immunological changes after splenectomy have been the subject of intensive research in recent years. As a consequence there has been a clear trend towards splenic salvage. Due to the availability of improved diagnostic investigations (sonography, CT) nonoperative treatment with close observation has become increasingly important in adults. 75 patients with documented splenic injury were prospectively evaluated over a 45-month period with an emphasis upon splenic preservation. Unstable patients had operative exploration with attempt at splenorrhaphy or partial splenic resection. Stable patients were managed nonoperatively, regardless of the degree of splenic injury as determined by sonography and/or computed tomography. In 38 patients the spleen was preserved by operative preservation in 20 and nonoperative treatment in 18 patients. 37 patients required splenectomy. Four patients were managed initially by nonoperative treatment, but required exploration for secondary rupture at 7, 7, 10 and 13 days. Delayed splenectomy was performed in three patients and one patient was treated by splenorrhaphy 7 days after admission. Bleeding complications occurred in one patient after splenorrhaphy (bleeding from the pancreatic tail) and the bleeding vessel could be transfixed during the same anaesthetic. Four patients required reexploration after splenectomy for hemorrhage (2) and evacuation of infected haematomas. The Injury Severity Score (ISS) of the splenectomy and splenic preservation group was determined. Splenectomised patients showed in the postoperative follow-up a significantly increased infection rate (40%, p less than 0.02) when compared to patients with splenic preservation (10%) or nonoperative treatment (11%), even when they were matched in respect of multiple trauma using the Injury Severity Score (ISS).

The haematological and immunological consequences of splenectomy have been the subject of increasingly intensive studies over the last few years. As a result there has been a significant change in the management of splenic trauma with the emphasis on organ preservation which has been associated with a possible reduction in postoperative infectious complications. The safety of splenic preservation (splenorrhaphy) has been demonstrated. There has also been a change in the increased use of non-surgical (conservative) management of injuries in adults, a policy which previously was reserved for children. There is no difference in the postoperative bleeding rate between patients with splenectomies or patients with splenorrhaphies. Non-surgical treatment is in adults not yet established. In our department splenic preservation gets an increasing weight in our treatment policy, even in patients with multiple injuries. Our treatment policy initially classifies the splenic injury into one of five groups and this determines the subsequent operative procedures. The crucial part of the surgical technique in splenic preservation involves the immediate dissection and delivery of the spleen from its subdiaphragmatic position, thus avoiding iatrogenic injuries which can readily occur in the emergency situation. The hilus is then clamped with a non-crushing vascular or intestinal clamp, which avoids blood loss during the repair. The methods used for the repair depend on the grade of the injury. Means to prevent sutures cutting through the tissue (resorbable collagen platelets, resorbable gauze, teflon stripes) and a variety of methods to achieve haemostasis (infra red photocoagulation, haemostatic material and supportive mesh) are used.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)