We have located links that may give you full text access.
Changing trends in the management of splenic injury.
American Journal of Surgery 1995 December
BACKGROUND: A gradual change in the management of splenic injuries has occurred at our institution. This study was therefore undertaken to determine whether changes in management of splenic injury influenced outcomes during the past 30 years.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of patients admitted with splenic trauma between 1965 and 1994 was performed. Two hundred seven patients were identified and demographic and outcome data were recorded. Patients were then grouped based upon the period in which they received treatment (ie, Period I [1965 to 1974], Period II [1975 to 1984], and Period III [1985 to 1994]), and the type of treatment received (ie, splenectomy, splenorrhaphy, or observation).
RESULTS: More patients were treated in Period III than in the other two periods, and Period III patients had shorter hospital stays. Splenectomy was solely used during Period I; splenorrhaphy and observation were occasionally performed during Period II; and splenectomy, splenorrhaphy, and observation were performed in near-equal numbers during Period III. Mortality was similar for each period, though Injury Severity Scores (ISS) were higher during later years. When compared by treatment modality, patients receiving splenectomy had higher ISS and splenic injury classifications.
CONCLUSION: Patients treated by splenorrhaphy and observation for splenic injury have markedly increased over the past 30 years without adverse outcome.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of patients admitted with splenic trauma between 1965 and 1994 was performed. Two hundred seven patients were identified and demographic and outcome data were recorded. Patients were then grouped based upon the period in which they received treatment (ie, Period I [1965 to 1974], Period II [1975 to 1984], and Period III [1985 to 1994]), and the type of treatment received (ie, splenectomy, splenorrhaphy, or observation).
RESULTS: More patients were treated in Period III than in the other two periods, and Period III patients had shorter hospital stays. Splenectomy was solely used during Period I; splenorrhaphy and observation were occasionally performed during Period II; and splenectomy, splenorrhaphy, and observation were performed in near-equal numbers during Period III. Mortality was similar for each period, though Injury Severity Scores (ISS) were higher during later years. When compared by treatment modality, patients receiving splenectomy had higher ISS and splenic injury classifications.
CONCLUSION: Patients treated by splenorrhaphy and observation for splenic injury have markedly increased over the past 30 years without adverse outcome.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app