Abstract
Blunt abdominal trauma resulting in solid organ injury to the spleen and liver is managed primarily with selective nonoperative management, with operative intervention reserved for patients who are hemodynamically unstable or who fail nonoperative management. The initial management of blunt abdominal trauma follows the principles of Advanced Trauma Life Support, including adherence to the ABCs of trauma and balanced resuscitation. A hemodynamically unstable patient with a solid organ injury and intra-abdominal hemorrhage or peritonitis is managed with emergent surgical exploration. A hemodynamically stable patient with a solid organ injury can undergo further imaging to delineate the extent of injury. The use of interventional radiology is a valuable adjunct to both nonoperative and operative management of solid organ injury. Nonoperative management includes a period of observation along with serial physical examinations and laboratory values.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Blunt solid organ injury
- Splenic injury
- Hepatic injury
- Nonoperative management of splenic injury
- Nonoperative management of hepatic injury
- Angioembolization of splenic injury
- Angioembolization of hepatic injury
- Splenectomy vaccinations
- Venous thromboembolism in solid organ injury
Case Presentation
A 38 year old male with no significant past medical history presents as a Class 1 trauma after a motorcycle collision at 60 miles per hour. The patient was wearing a helmet and had loss of consciousness. En route to the hospital, the patient had a blood pressure of 86/40 and a heart rate of 120. EMS placed a cervical collar, inserted 2 large-bore peripheral IVs and administered 2 L of isotonic crystalloid. On arrival to emergency room, the patient has a blood pressure of 110/60 and a heart rate of 80. His Glasgow Coma Scale is 15. He complains of left-sided shoulder pain. He has bilateral equal but decreased breath sounds. His abdomen is soft and mildly tender in the left upper quadrant. He has no evidence of other injuries.
Question
How should this patient be managed?
Answer
Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) guidelines [1]
This is a multiply injured blunt trauma patient with hypotension responsive to fluid administration. Management should proceed along ATLS guidelines. This starts with the ABCs of trauma: evaluation of the Airway with cervical spine stabilization, Breathing and Circulation with external hemorrhage control. The patient is able to talk and currently does not need an airway. Cervical spine protection is maintained. He is breathing easily. The patient has already received 2 L of crystalloid. If the patient demonstrates continued signs of bleeding, his resuscitation should continue with blood products.
The next task is to figure out if the initial hypotension reflects intra-cavitary hemorrhage. A chest x-ray, pelvis film and a focused assessment of sonography in trauma (FAST) exam should be performed [1–4].
If there is fluid on FAST exam and the patient becomes hemodynamically unstable, he should be taken to the operative room. However, as this patient is hemodynamically stable, further imaging can be performed.
Minimal fluid was seen on FAST exam in the left upper quadrant. CT imaging confirmed multiple left-sided rib fractures with underlying pulmonary contusions, left scapula fracture and grade III splenic laceration with active contrast extravasation (Fig. 78.1). Splenic angioembolization was indicated for treatment as the patient was hemodynamically stable (Fig. 78.2). Post-procedure ICU admission was indicated for serial abdominal examinations and monitoring for bleeding. His hemoglobin remained stable and his scapula fracture was managed with closed reduction and a sling. Thoracic epidural analgesia was used for pain management associated with his rib fractures. He was discharged in stable condition on hospital day 5 (Fig. 78.3).
Principles of Management
Unstable Versus Stable Blunt Abdominal Trauma
The initial management of blunt intra-abdominal injuries depends crucially on whether the patient is hemodynamically stable or unstable. Trauma patients who are unstable are bleeding until proven otherwise, and prompt evaluation is indicated to determine the source of bleeding. There are 5 areas into which a trauma patient can bleed to death – the chest, the abdomen, the pelvis and retroperitoneum, the thigh and externally [1].
The location of bleeding can be determined quickly with minimal testing in the trauma bay. A chest x-ray and pelvis film will determine if a patient has a massive hemothorax or an open pelvic fracture, respectively. The FAST exam rapidly evaluates 4 areas: the pericardium, the area between liver and right kidney, the area between spleen and left kidney, and the suprapubic area, with any free fluid presumed to represent hemorrhage [1]. Alternatively, a diagnostic peritoneal aspiration (DPA) or lavage (DPL) can be used to determine if there is fluid or blood within the peritoneal cavity.
Patients with blunt injury who are hemodynamically unstable with evidence of intraperitoneal hemorrhage on FAST or DPL should be taken to the operating room for an immediate laparotomy [5–9]. Patients who are hemodynamically stable can proceed with further 3D imaging and nonoperative management. The current management of blunt hepatic and splenic injury is selective nonoperative management (NOM) with operative management in those patients who present with hemodynamic instability or have ongoing evidence of bleeding [9–12].
Balanced Resuscitation
A tenet of trauma resuscitation is ensuring that patients have appropriate intravenous access [1]. Most patients can be managed with two large-bore (14–16 g) peripheral intravenous catheters. The type and amount of IVF that is optimal for trauma patients is constantly debated. Crystalloids are associated with improved survival in trauma patients compared to colloids [13]. Lactated Ringer’s is preferred to Normal Saline because it is associated with less metabolic acidosis in the setting of massive hemorrhagic shock in animal models [14].
The Inflammation and Host Response to Injury Project defined a systolic blood pressure less than 90 mmHg and/or a heart rate greater than 130 beats per minute as indicative of shock in a traumatically injured patient [15]. ATLS guidelines also recommend the initial administration of 1–2 l of isotonic crystalloid in the resuscitation of a trauma patient [1]. For a patient that requires further resuscitation, the administration of blood products is recommended, as excessive crystalloid resuscitation has been associated with increased morbidity and length of stay in blunt trauma patients [16]. Two recent trials investigating the timing and ratio of blood product administration have shown improved mortality with the early administration of plasma [17] and better hemostasis with fewer deaths from exsanguination without adverse effects with the administration of blood, plasma and platelets in a 1:1:1 ratio [18].
Prompt hemorrhage control should be the main goal of hemorrhagic shock management, and can be accomplished through the use of external hemorrhage control, Interventional Radiology for angioembolization or a surgical procedure.
Imaging and Diagnosis
Solid organ injury after blunt abdominal trauma in stable patients is best visualized by CT scan abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast [5–8]. The severity of liver and spleen injuries can be classified according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma organ grading scales (Tables 78.1 and 78.2) [19]. Blunt hollow viscus injury is uncommon but should be suspected in patients with extraluminal air on 3-D imaging, frank succus or particulate material on peritoneal lavage or evolving peritonitis on serial examination.
Nonoperative Management (NOM) of Blunt Solid Organ Injury
Patients who are hemodynamically stable without peritonitis and are found to have a blunt spleen or liver injury can undergo NOM [5–8, 10, 20]. NOM involves a period of in-hospital observation, serial abdominal examinations, serial hematocrit measurements and possibly a period of bedrest [5, 6]. NOM should be undertaken in an environment and institution where patients can be appropriately monitored, undergo serial abdominal exams and the capability to provide operative intervention is readily available. Blunt kidney injuries are, in general, also treated successfully with NOM.
Angioembolization for Blunt Solid Organ Injury
Angioembolization should be considered as an adjunct to nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury in patients with a grade 3 or higher injury, a contrast blush on CT scan, moderate hemoperitoneum on CT scan and evidence of ongoing bleeding [5, 6]. Having an institutional protocol for angioembolization has led to decreased LOS and decreased use of hospital resources [21]. The implementation of protocols for angioembolization in patients who are high risk for failure of NOM (contrast blush and grades 3–5) are associated with increased success of NOM [22, 23]. For blunt hepatic injuries, angioembolization should be considered for stable patients with contrast extravasation on CT. Early embolization in blunt hepatic injury is associated with decreased transfusion requirements and decreased need for hepatic operative intervention [24, 25]. Angioembolization can also be used as an adjunct to operative management [26–28].
Post-splenectomy Vaccinations
An initial report by King and Schumacker in 1951 documented severe infection after splenectomy in infants [29]. Since then, overwhelming post-splenectomy infection (OPSI) and mortality from it has been documented and recognized in asplenic patients from a variety of different mechanisms, including patients who have undergone a splenectomy due to trauma [30]. The CDC recommends ensuring a complete vaccination panel after splenectomy: 13-valent and 1, 2 or 3 doses of 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine depending on previous vaccination, two doses of quadrivalent meningococcal vaccination followed by a dose every 5 years, Haemophilus Influenza type B vaccination and evaluation for influenza, Td/Tdap [tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis), varicella, human papillomavirus, zoster and measles, mumps, rubella vaccines [31]. Shatz and colleagues found that administration of vaccinations at 2 weeks post-splenectomy were associated with the best antibody response compared to vaccination at 1, 7, or 28 days [32].
Evidence Contour
Who Should Be Managed Nonoperatively?
Previously, age greater than 55, neurologic status, high grade of injury and associated injuries were considered contraindications to NOM of blunt splenic injury. Subsequent studies have shown that NOM is feasible and safe in these populations, although patients greater than 55 years old have a higher mortality rate with blunt splenic injury despite the choice of management strategy [33, 34]. These patients had a higher mortality with failure of NOM than the younger cohort [35]. Head injury or altered mental status is also not a contraindication to NOM of either hepatic or splenic injuries [36]. A review from 2013 cautioned clinicians to be aware of factors in the literature which are associated with increased failure of NOM: age greater than 40 years old, ISS of 25 or greater, and a AAST splenic injury grade 3 or higher [37]. Most studies agree that increasing grade of injury and an increased ISS are associated with an increased rate of failed NOM, but we are still able to achieve high levels of NOM success in these patients [11, 38, 39]. Patients with multiple injuries, including multiple solid organ injuries, can be managed nonoperatively, although they do have a higher failure rate [40]. For blunt hepatic injuries, intraperitoneal contrast and hemoperitoneum in multiple quadrants are predictive of the need for operative intervention, even in hemodynamically stable patients [41].
How Should Nonoperative Management Be Accomplished?
There are no guidelines published to outline the timing and frequency of hematocrit measurements, serial abdominal examinations, length of monitoring and duration of bed rest, if at all. A retrospective cohort study of blunt solid organ injury and the timing of mobilization did not demonstrate an increase in delayed hemorrhage based on early mobilization, and led the authors to conclude that bed rest should not be a part of NOM protocols for blunt solid organ injury [42]. Centers with established protocols for NOM have decreased LOS and a low rate of NOM failure. A protocol with clear inclusion and exclusion criteria for NOM along with an outline for the frequency and duration of serial abdominal examinations, hematocrit draws and length of bed rest has led to a decrease in hospital and ICU LOS and an increase of NOM success without an increase in mortality [43–45].
Is Follow-Up Imaging Necessary?
For blunt splenic injury managed initially without angioembolization, the need for or timing of follow up imaging is not clearly documented in the literature. A Delphi consensus statement regarding blunt splenic injury found a fifty-fifty split between experts regarding the need for repeat imaging during the initial hospital admission [9]. Shapiro and colleagues found that, among their trauma population, in the absence of clinical signs and symptoms of bleeding, a repeat CT scan did not change management [46]. However, subsequent studies have suggested that repeat imaging allows for the identification and subsequent angioembolization of splenic artery pseudoaneurysm (SPA) or arterial extravasation (AE) and reduces failure of NOM. Weinberg and colleagues described a protocol of repeat CT imaging at 24–48 h in all patients except those greater than 55 with a grade I injury and demonstrated a 97 % splenic salvage rate [47]. Leeper and colleagues developed a protocol of repeat CT imaging at 48 h after a sentinel event, which was associated with a decrease in the failure of NOM from 12 % to less than 1 % [48]. They recommend early repeat imaging to improve detection of SPA and AE, which can then be managed with SAE.
Routine follow up imaging for blunt hepatic injuries should be determined by patient’s signs and symptoms and does not need to be routinely done prior to discharge [49, 50]. When repeat imaging demonstrates complications, there is generally a variety of interventional or operative management strategies. Bile duct disruptions generally present in a delayed fashion after high-grade hepatic injuries [51]. HIDA scan is almost 100 % sensitive and specific for diagnosing biliary leaks, and high output leaks can be managed with endoscopic stenting of the biliary tree [52]. Hepatic abscesses after blunt trauma are managed with antibiotics and percutaneous catheter drainage at minimum and operative intervention at maximum [53]. Hemorrhage in patients initially treated nonoperatively usually occurs early, while biliary and infectious complications occur later [54].
When Should We Initiate Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prophylaxis in Solid Organ Injury Patients?
Trauma patients have the highest rate of VTE among all subgroups of hospitalized patients with rates up to 40 % for deep venous thrombosis and 20 % for pulmonary embolism [55, 56]. The Inflammation and the Host Response to Injury project guidelines and the CHEST guidelines for VTE in the trauma patient recommends the initiation of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in conjunction with mechanical prophylaxis in the absence of contraindications [55, 56]. A retrospective study by Eberle and colleagues demonstrated no increase in failure rates of NOM or blood transfusion requirements when LMWH was initiated early (within 3 days of injury) versus late in patients with blunt solid organ injury [57]. Joseph and colleagues also demonstrated that there was no difference between the early (under 48 h), intermediate (48–72 h), and late (greater then 72 h) groups in terms of operative intervention or post prophylaxis blood transfusion in patients with blunt solid organ injury [58]. The EAST Practice Management Guidelines for both blunt hepatic and splenic injury states that there is no evidence that chemical VTE prophylaxis increases bleeding complications or the failure of NOM, however there are no prospective studies defining a “safe” initiation time for LMWH following blunt solid organ injury [5, 6].
References
Advanced Trauma Life Support for doctors ATLS: manuals for coordinators and faculty. 9th ed. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 2012.
Dolich MO, McKenney MG, Varela JE, Compton RP, McKenney KL, Cohn SM. 2,576 ultrasounds for blunt abdominal trauma. J Trauma. 2001;50(1):108–12.
Ollerton JE, Sugrue M, Balogh Z, D’Amours SK, Giles A, Wyllie P. Prospective study to evaluate the influence of FAST on trauma patient management. J Trauma. 2006;60(4):785–91.
Robert Reardon MD. Ultrasound in trauma – The FAST Exam. Focused assessment with sonography in trauma [Internet]. Ultrasound Guide for Emergency Physicians © 2008. Available from: http://www.sonoguide.com/FAST.html.
Stassen NA, Bhullar I, Cheng JD, Crandall ML, Friese RS, Guillamondegui OD, et al. Selective nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(5 Suppl 4):S294–300.
Stassen NA, Bhullar I, Cheng JD, Crandall M, Friese R, Guillamondegui O, et al. Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic injury: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(5 Suppl 4):S288–93.
Moore FA, Davis JW, Moore Jr EE, Cocanour CS, West MA, McIntyre Jr RC. Western Trauma Association (WTA) critical decisions in trauma: management of adult blunt splenic trauma. J Trauma. 2008;65(5):1007–11.
Kozar RA, Feliciano DV, Moore EE, Moore FA, Cocanour CS, West MA, et al. Western Trauma Association/critical decisions in trauma: operative management of adult blunt hepatic trauma. J Trauma. 2011;71(1):1–5.
Olthof DC, van der Vlies CH, Joosse P, van Delden OM, Jurkovich GJ, Goslings JC, et al. Consensus strategies for the nonoperative management of patients with blunt splenic injury: a Delphi study. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(6):1567–74.
Cogbill TH, Moore EE, Jurkovich GJ, Morris JA, Mucha Jr P, Shackford SR, et al. Nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma: a multicenter experience. J Trauma. 1989;29(10):1312–7.
Haan JM, Bochicchio GV, Kramer N, Scalea TM. Nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury: a 5-year experience. J Trauma Injury Infect Crit Care. 2005;58(3):492–8.
Hurtuk M, Reed 2nd RL, Esposito TJ, Davis KA, Luchette FA. Trauma surgeons practice what they preach: the NTDB story on solid organ injury management. J Trauma. 2006;61(2):243–54; discussion 54–5.
Finfer S, Bellomo R, Boyce N, French J, Myburgh J, Norton R, et al. A comparison of albumin and saline for fluid resuscitation in the intensive care unit. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(22):2247–56.
Todd SR, Malinoski D, Muller PJ, Schreiber MA. Lactated Ringer’s is superior to normal saline in the resuscitation of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock. J Trauma. 2007;62(3):636–9.
Moore FA, McKinley BA, Moore EE, Nathens AB, West M, Shapiro MB, et al. Inflammation and the Host Response to Injury, a large-scale collaborative project: patient-oriented research core--standard operating procedures for clinical care. III. Guidelines for shock resuscitation. J Trauma. 2006;61(1):82–9.
Kasotakis G, Sideris A, Yang Y, de Moya M, Alam H, King DR, et al. Aggressive early crystalloid resuscitation adversely affects outcomes in adult blunt trauma patients: an analysis of the Glue Grant database. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(5):1215–21; discussion 21–2.
Holcomb JB, del Junco DJ, Fox EE, Wade CE, Cohen MJ, Schreiber MA, Alarcon LH, Bai Y, Brasel KJ, Bulger EM, Cotton BA, Matijevic N, Muskat P, Myers JG, Phelan HA, White CE, Zhang J, Rahbar MH, PROMMTT Study Group. The prospective, observational, multicenter, major trauma transfusion (PROMMTT) study: comparative effectiveness of a time-varying treatment with competing risks. JAMA Surg. 2013;148(2):127–36.
Holcomb JB, Tilley BC, Baraniuk S, Fox EE, Wade CE, Podbielski JM, et al. Transfusion of plasma, platelets, and red blood cells in a 1:1:1 vs a 1:1:2 ratio and mortality in patients with severe trauma: the PROPPR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;313(5):471–82.
Tinkoff G, Esposito TJ, Reed J, Kilgo P, Fildes J, Pasquale M, et al. American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Organ Injury Scale I: spleen, liver, and kidney, validation based on the National Trauma Data Bank. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207(5):646–55.
Croce MA, Fabian TC, Menke PG, Waddle-Smith L, Minard G, Kudsk KA, et al. Nonoperative management of blunt hepatic trauma is the treatment of choice for hemodynamically stable patients. Results of a prospective trial. Ann Surg. 1995;221(6):744–53; discussion 53–5.
Haan J, Ilahi ON, Kramer M, Scalea TM, Myers J. Protocol-driven nonoperative management in patients with blunt splenic trauma and minimal associated injury decreases length of stay. J Trauma. 2003;55(2):317–21; discussion 21–2.
Bhullar IS, Frykberg ER, Tepas 3rd JJ, Siragusa D, Loper T, Kerwin AJ. At first blush: absence of computed tomography contrast extravasation in Grade IV or V adult blunt splenic trauma should not preclude angioembolization. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(1):105–11; discussion 11–2.
Miller PR, Chang MC, Hoth JJ, Mowery NT, Hildreth AN, Martin RS, et al. Prospective trial of angiography and embolization for all grade III to V blunt splenic injuries: nonoperative management success rate is significantly improved. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218(4):644–8.
Wahl WL, Ahrns KS, Brandt MM, Franklin GA, Taheri PA. The need for early angiographic embolization in blunt liver injuries. J Trauma. 2002;52(6):1097–101.
Mohr AM, Lavery RF, Barone A, Bahramipour P, Magnotti LJ, Osband AJ, et al. Angiographic embolization for liver injuries: low mortality, high morbidity. J Trauma. 2003;55(6):1077–81; discussion 81–2.
Asensio JA, Roldan G, Petrone P, Rojo E, Tillou A, Kuncir E, et al. Operative management and outcomes in 103 AAST-OIS grades IV and V complex hepatic injuries: trauma surgeons still need to operate, but angioembolization helps. J Trauma. 2003;54(4):647–53; discussion 53–4.
Letoublon C, Morra I, Chen Y, Monnin V, Voirin D, Arvieux C. Hepatic arterial embolization in the management of blunt hepatic trauma: indications and complications. J Trauma. 2011;70(5):1032–6; discussion 6–7.
Misselbeck TS, Teicher EJ, Cipolle MD, Pasquale MD, Shah KT, Dangleben DA, et al. Hepatic angioembolization in trauma patients: indications and complications. J Trauma. 2009;67(4):769–73.
King H, Shumacker Jr HB. Splenic studies. I.Susceptibility to infection after splenectomy performed in infancy. Ann Surg. 1952;136(2):239–42.
Krivit W. Overwhelming postsplenectomy infection. Am J Hematol. 1977;2(2):193–201.
Services USDoHaH. Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule – United States – 2016. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/adult/adult-schedule.pdf.
Shatz DV, Romero-Steiner S, Elie CM, Holder PF, Carlone GM. Antibody responses in postsplenectomy trauma patients receiving the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine at 14 versus 28 days postoperatively. J Trauma. 2002;53(6):1037–42.
Nix JA, Costanza M, Daley BJ, Powell MA, Enderson BL. Outcome of the current management of splenic injuries. J Trauma. 2001;50(5):835–42.
Cocanour CS, Moore FA, Ware DN, Marvin RG, Duke JH. Age should not be a consideration for nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury. J Trauma. 2000;48(4):606–10; discussion 10–2.
Harbrecht BG, Peitzman AB, Rivera L, Heil B, Croce M, Morris Jr JA, et al. Contribution of age and gender to outcome of blunt splenic injury in adults: multicenter study of the eastern association for the surgery of trauma. J Trauma. 2001;51(5):887–95.
Archer LP, Rogers FB, Shackford SR. Selective nonoperative management of liver and spleen injuries in neurologically impaired adult patients. Arch Surg. 1996;131(3):309–15.
Olthof DC, Joosse P, van der Vlies CH, de Haan RJ, Goslings JC. Prognostic factors for failure of nonoperative management in adults with blunt splenic injury: a systematic review. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(2):546–57.
McIntyre LK, Schiff M, Jurkovich GJ. Failure of nonoperative management of splenic injuries: causes and consequences. Arch Surg. 2005;140(6):563–8; discussion 8–9.
Jeremitsky E, Smith RS, Ong AW. Starting the clock: defining nonoperative management of blunt splenic injury by time. Am J Surg. 2013;205(3):298–301.
Malhotra AK, Latifi R, Fabian TC, Ivatury RR, Dhage S, Bee TK, et al. Multiplicity of solid organ injury: influence on management and outcomes after blunt abdominal trauma. J Trauma. 2003;54(5):925–9.
Fang JF, Wong YC, Lin BC, Hsu YP, Chen MF. The CT risk factors for the need of operative treatment in initially hemodynamically stable patients after blunt hepatic trauma. J Trauma. 2006;61(3):547–53; discussion 53–4.
London JA, Parry L, Galante J, Battistella F. Safety of early mobilization of patients with blunt solid organ injuries. Arch Surg. 2008;143(10):972–6; discussion 7.
Brasel KJ, Weigelt JA, Christians KK, Somberg LB. The value of process measures in evaluating an evidence-based guideline. Surgery. 2003;134(4):605–10.
McCray VW, Davis JW, Lemaster D, Parks SN. Observation for nonoperative management of the spleen: how long is long enough? J Trauma. 2008;65(6):1354–8.
Izu BS, Ryan M, Markert RJ, Ekeh AP, McCarthy MC. Impact of splenic injury guidelines on hospital stay and charges in patients with isolated splenic injury. Surgery. 2009;146(4):787–91; discussion 91–3.
Shapiro MJ, Krausz C, Durham RM, Mazuski JE. Overuse of splenic scoring and computed tomographic scans. J Trauma. 1999;47(4):651–8.
Weinberg JA, Magnotti LJ, Croce MA, Edwards NM, Fabian TC. The utility of serial computed tomography imaging of blunt splenic injury: still worth a second look? J Trauma. 2007;62(5):1143–7; discussion 7–8.
Leeper WR, Leeper TJ, Ouellette D, Moffat B, Sivakumaran T, Charyk-Stewart T, et al. Delayed hemorrhagic complications in the nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma: early screening leads to a decrease in failure rate. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76(6):1349–53.
Cuff RF, Cogbill TH, Lambert PJ. Nonoperative management of blunt liver trauma: the value of follow-up abdominal computed tomography scans. Am Surg. 2000;66(4):332–6.
Cox JC, Fabian TC, Maish GO, Bee TK, Pritchard FE, Russ SE, et al. Routine follow-up imaging is unnecessary in the management of blunt hepatic injury. J Trauma Injury Infect Crit Care. 2005;1175–80.
Christmas AB, Wilson AK, Manning B, Franklin GA, Miller FB, Richardson JD, et al. Selective management of blunt hepatic injuries including nonoperative management is a safe and effective strategy. Surgery. 2005;138(4):606–10; discussion 10–1.
Wahl WL, Brandt MM, Hemmila MR, Arbabi S. Diagnosis and management of bile leaks after blunt liver injury. Surgery. 2005;138(4):742–7; discussion 7–8.
Claridge JA, Young JS. A successful multimodality strategy for management of liver injuries. Am Surg. 2000;66(10):920–5; discussion 5–6.
Kozar RA, Moore FA, Cothren CC, Moore EE, Sena M, Bulger EM, et al. Risk factors for hepatic morbidity following nonoperative management: multicenter study. Arch Surg. 2006;141(5):451–8; discussion 8–9.
Cuschieri J, Freeman B, O’Keefe G, Harbrecht BG, Bankey P, Johnson JL, et al. Inflammation and the host response to injury a large-scale collaborative project: patient-oriented research core standard operating procedure for clinical care X. Guidelines for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in the trauma patient. J Trauma. 2008;65(4):944–50.
Gould MK, Garcia DA, Wren SM, Karanicolas PJ, Arcelus JI, Heit JA, et al. Prevention of VTE in nonorthopedic surgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e227S–77.
Eberle BM, Schnuriger B, Inaba K, Cestero R, Kobayashi L, Barmparas G, et al. Thromboembolic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin in patients with blunt solid abdominal organ injuries undergoing nonoperative management: current practice and outcomes. J Trauma. 2011;70(1):141–6; discussion 7.
Joseph B, Pandit V, Harrison C, Lubin D, Kulvatunyou N, Zangbar B, et al. Early thromboembolic prophylaxis in patients with blunt solid abdominal organ injuries undergoing nonoperative management: is it safe? Am J Surg. 2015;209(1):194–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gwinn, E.C., Park, P.K. (2017). Blunt Abdominal Trauma. In: Hyzy, R. (eds) Evidence-Based Critical Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43341-7_78
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43341-7_78
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43339-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43341-7
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)