LAUSR

INTRODUCTION To compare the outcomes of proximal (pSAE) versus distal (dSAE) splenic artery embolisation for management of focal distal arterial splenic injuries secondary to blunt splenic trauma. METHOD Ethical approval was granted by the hospital research and ethics committee, Project 389/19. All patients who underwent splenic artery embolisation secondary to blunt abdominal trauma from 1 January 2009 to 1 January 2019 were reviewed. Patients with a tandem embolisation (both proximal and distal embolisations) or those with no acute vascular injury on angiography were excluded. Patient demographics, injury type/ AAST grade (2018 classification), technique of embolisation and outcomes were collected. Complications and splenectomy rates up to 30 days were recorded. RESULTS 136 out of 232 patients had an embolisation performed for a distal vascular injury including active arterial bleeding, pseudoaneurysm or arteriovenous fistula. Mean age was 41 (range 16-84). Mean AAST grade was 4 (range 3-5). Mean Injury Severity Score was 22. pSAE was performed in 79.4% (n = 108) and dSAE in 20.6% (n = 28). Major complications occurred in 12 patients (pSAE n = 12, 11.1%; dSAE n = 0, P > 0.05); 6 pSAE required splenectomy (n = 6, 5.6%). There was no significant difference in outcomes between the two groups or when based on AAST grading. CONCLUSION No significant difference was observed between proximal and distal embolisation techniques for blunt trauma patients with a distal vascular injury in terms of technical and clinical success.