Back to Search Start Over

Observation-first versus angioembolization-first approach in stable patients with blunt liver trauma: A WTA multicenter study.

Authors :
Nguyen PD
Nahmias J
Aryan N
Samuels JM
Cripps M
Carmichael H
McIntyre R Jr
Urban S
Burlew CC
Velopulos C
Ballow S
Dirks RC
Spalding MC
LaRiccia A
Farrell MS
Stein DM
Truitt MS
Grossman Verner HM
Mentzer CJ
Mack TJ
Ball CG
Mukherjee K
Mladenov G
Haase DJ
Abdou H
Schroeppel TJ
Rodriquez J
Bala M
Keric N
Crigger M
Dhillon NK
Ley EJ
Egodage T
Williamson J
Cardenas TC
Eugene V
Patel K
Costello K
Bonne S
Elgammal FS
Dorlac W
Pederson C
Werner NL
Haan JM
Lightwine K
Semon G
Spoor K
Harmon LA
Grigorian A
Source :
The journal of trauma and acute care surgery [J Trauma Acute Care Surg] 2024 Nov 01; Vol. 97 (5), pp. 764-769. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 May 27.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Background: Prior studies evaluating observation versus angioembolization (AE) for blunt liver injuries (BLT) with contrast extravasation (CE) on computed tomography imaging have yielded inconsistent conclusions, primarily due to limitations in single-center and/or retrospective study design. Therefore, this multicenter study aims to compare an observation versus AE-first approach for BLT, hypothesizing decreased liver-related complications (LRCs) with observation.<br />Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a multicenter, prospective observational study (2019-2021) across 23 centers. Adult patients with BLT + CE undergoing observation or AE within 8 hours of arrival were included. The primary outcome was LRCs, defined as perihepatic fluid collection, bile leak/biloma, pseudoaneurysm, hepatic necrosis, and/or hepatic abscess. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate risk factors associated with LRCs.<br />Results: From 128 patients presenting with BLT + CE on imaging, 71 (55.5%) underwent observation-first and 57 (45.5%) AE-first management. Both groups were comparable in age, vitals, mechanism of injury, and shock index (all p > 0.05), however the AE group had increased frequency of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Grade IV injuries (51.0% vs. 22.0%, p = 0.002). The AE cohort demonstrated increased rates of in-hospital LRCs (36.8% vs. 12.7%, p = 0.038), emergency department representation (25.0% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.025), and hospital readmission for LRCs (12.3% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.012). However, the two cohorts had similar mortality rates (5.7% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.912). After adjusting for age, ISS, and grade of liver injury, an AE-first approach had a similar associated risk of LRCs compared with observation-first management (odds ratio, 1.949; 95% confidence interval, 0.673-5.643; p = 0.219).<br />Conclusion: Patients with blunt liver injury and CE undergoing an observation-first approach were associated with a similar adjusted risk of LRCs and rate of mortality compared with AE-first approach. Overall, this calls for reevaluation of the role of routine AE in blunt liver trauma patients with CE. Future prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.<br />Level of Evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management, Level IV.<br /> (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2163-0763
Volume :
97
Issue :
5
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
The journal of trauma and acute care surgery
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
39443838
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000004372