Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
Users online:453   Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 35-39

Changing aspects in the management of splenic injury patients: Experience of 129 isolated splenic injury patients at level 1 trauma center from India

JPN Apex Trauma Center, Division of Trauma Surgery and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Amit Gupta
Room No. 305, JPN Apex Trauma Center, Trauma Surgery and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raj Nagar, New Delhi
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/JETS.JETS_1_18

Rights and Permissions

Background: The spleen is most the commonly injured solid organ in abdominal trauma. Operative management (OM) has been challenged by several studies favoring successful non-OM (NOM) aided by modern era interventional radiology. The results of these studies are confounded by associated injuries impacting outcome. The aim of this study is to compare NOM and OM for isolated splenic injury in an Indian Level 1 Trauma Center. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of prospective database. Results: A total of 1496 patients were admitted with abdominal injuries. One hundred and twenty-nine patients admitted with diagnosis of isolated splenic injury from January 2009 to December 2016 were included in the study. RTIs, followed by falls from height, were the most common mechanisms of injury. Ninety-two (71.3%) patients with isolated splenic trauma were successfully managed nonoperatively. Thirty-seven (28.7%) required surgery, of which three were due to the failure of NOM. Three patients in the nonoperative group underwent splenectomy later, giving an overall success rate of 96.8% for NOM. Patients with isolated splenic trauma requiring OM had higher grade splenic injury (Grade 4/5), higher blood transfusion requirements (P < 0.001), and prolonged Intensive Care Unit and hospital stay in comparison to patients in the nonoperative group. No patient died in the NOM group; two patients died in the splenectomy group due to hemorrhagic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome, respectively. Conclusion: Although NOM is successful in most patients with blunt isolated splenic injuries, careful selection is the most important factor dictating the success of NOM.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded7    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal