title: Age should be considered in the decision making of prophylactic splenic angioembolization in nonoperative management of blunt splenic trauma: a study of 208 consecutive civilian trauma patients.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  A strategy of prophylactic splenic angioembolization using observation failure risk (OFR) computed tomographic (CT) scan criteria has been proposed recently. The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the relevance of the criteria in terms of delayed splenic rupture in patients with blunt splenic injury.
  
  
  METHODS
  All patients with blunt splenic injuries admitted consecutively between January 2005 and January 2010 to our institution were included. Clinical, CT scan, and angiographic data, initial management, and outcome were noted. Patients managed expectantly were classified according to OFR CT scan criteria (high OFR was defined by at least one of the following CT scan signs: blush, pseudoaneurysm, Organ Injury Scale [OIS] grade III with a large hemoperitoneum, and OIS grade IV or 5). Initial management success was especially studied.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Among the 208 patients included, 161 (77%) were treated by observation (35 OIS grade I, 64 OIS grade II, 33 OIS grade III, 18 OIS grade IV, and 11 OIS grade V) and 129 (80%) were men, with a mean (SD) age of 36.1 (18.7) years and a mean (SD) Injury Severity Score of 20.8 (15.4). Forty-nine patients (30%) had high OFR CT scan criteria. Thirteen patients (8%) experienced observation failure. High OFR CT scan criteria (odds ratio, 11; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-47.5) and patients 50 years and older (odds ratio, 33.9; 95% confidence interval, 6.2-185.5) were independent factors related to observation failure. The positive predictive value of OFR CT scan criteria for observation failure was 18%, and the negative predictive value was 96%. The corresponding values were 67% and 90%, respectively, in patients 50 years and older and 3% and 99%, respectively, in patients younger than 50 years.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  OFR CT scan criteria lack specificity to predict observation failure, mainly in patients younger than 50 years. Age should be considered when identifying patients requiring prophylactic splenic angioembolization.
  
  
  METHODS
  Diagnostic study, level III.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, Montpellier, France.
authors.forename: Guillaume
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Brault-Noble
authors.forename: Jonathan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Charbit
authors.forename: Patrick
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Chardon
authors.forename: Laurent
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Barral
authors.forename: Françoise
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Guillon
authors.forename: Patrice
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Taourel
authors.forename: Xavier
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Capdevila
authors.forename: Ingrid
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Millet
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D015331:Cohort Studies; D004621:Embolization, Therapeutic; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D015601:Injury Severity Score; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D018579:Patient Selection; D012307:Risk Factors; D013154:Spleen / Q000293:injuries*; D013161:Splenic Rupture / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed; D014949:Wounds, Nonpenetrating / Q000150:complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000628:therapy*; D055815:Young Adult