Follow-up strategies after non-operative treatment of traumatic splenic injuries: a systematic review

• Published in: Langenbeck's archives of surgery 2024-10, Vol.409 (1), p.315, Article 315
• Main Authors: Olsen, Amanda, Possfelt-Møller, Emma, Jensen, Lasse Rehné, Taudorf, Mikkel, Rudolph, Søren Steemann, Preisler, Louise, Penninga, Luit
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdominal Surgery; Cardiac Surgery; General Surgery; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Systematic Review; Thoracic Surgery; Traumatic Surgery; Vascular Surgery
• ISSN: 1435-2451; 1435-2451
• DOI: 10.1007/s00423-024-03504-8

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.