Interventional treatment experience in multiple injury with major abdominal or pelvic injuries: 160 cases analysis

• Main Authors: Tian-Xi Zhang, Mei Han, Peng Ye, Quan Hu, Jia-Lin Li, Ling Yin, An-Yong Yu
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier 2018-02-01
• Series: Chinese Journal of Traumatology
• Subjects: Abdominal injury; Multiple trauma; Embolization; Haemorrhage; Prognosis
• Online Access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1008127517302432

Purpose: To observe the therapeutic effect of interventional embolization and haemorrhage control in multiple trauma patients with a major abdominal or pelvic injury. Methods: Data of 160 multiple trauma patients with a major abdominal or pelvic injury were retrospectively analyzed. They were admitted into the Department of Emergency of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical College from October 2013 to April 2016. Eighty-seven patients who received emergent intervention for embolization and haemorrhage control were set as group A, including 72 males and 15 females, with an average age of (39.32 ± 14.0) years. Patients underwent emergent intervention for embolization and hemostasis. The other 73 patients who received traditional surgeries were set as group B, including 62 males and 11 females, with an average age of (38.48 ± 13.12) years. The time from admission to emergency intervention, the time of interventional embolization, transfusion during hospitalization, length of stay and prognosis were observed. The whole treatment and prognosis were compared between group A and group B. Results: In group A, the average time from admission to intervention exploration was (132.05 ± 86.80) min, the average operation time was (149 ± 49.69) min, the average hospitalization time was (18.37 ± 4.71) days, the average amount of RBC transfusion during hospitalization was (7.2 ± 4.33) units, and the mortality was 4.60% (4 patients died). The corresponding data in group B were respectively (138.95 ± 82.49) min, (183 ± 52.39) min, (22.72 ± 6.63) days, (12.23 ± 5.43) units, and 9.59% (7 cases died). There was no statistical difference in the time from admission to operation between the two groups (p > 0.05), but there was statistical difference in operation time, RBC transfusion, hospitalization time, prognosis, and mortality between the two groups (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: The emergent intervention for embolization and haemorrhage control of multiple trauma patients with a major abdominal or pelvic injury and visceral organ haemorrhage has the advantages of less trauma, shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, less blood transfusion in comparison to the traditional emergency surgeries.