Colonoscopic blunt splenic injury: a rare but an important complication

Asadi, Hamed; Rhodes, Alexander; Mitchell, Peter; Dowling, Richard

doi:10.1111/ans.13327

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…23 publications (5 case series of two or more patients and 18 singular case reports) were included of 30 individual patients primarily treated with splenic artery embolisation for splenic laceration after colonoscopy 27,30–51 . Individual patient data are shown in Supplementary Table and presented in comparison to splenectomy and splenorrhaphy in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…23 publications (5 case series of two or more patients and 18 singular case reports) were included of 30 individual patients primarily treated with splenic artery embolisation for splenic laceration after colonoscopy. 27 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 Individual patient data are shown in Supplementary Table S1 and presented in comparison to splenectomy and splenorrhaphy in Table 1 . Most patients were asymptomatic and a only a minority (20%) of colonoscopies were interventional, including biopsy or polypectomy (Supplementary Table S1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Splenic artery embolisation for splenic injury during colonoscopy: A systematic review

Lukies,

Clements

2023

UEG Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSplenic injury due to colonoscopy is rare, but has high mortality. While historically treated conservatively for low‐grade injuries or with splenectomy for high‐grade injuries, splenic artery embolisation is increasingly utilised, reflecting modern treatment guidelines for external blunt trauma. This systematic review evaluates outcomes of published cases of splenic injury due to colonoscopy treated with splenic artery embolisation.MethodsA systematic review was performed of published articles concerning splenic injury during colonoscopy treated primarily with splenic artery embolisation, splenectomy, or splenorrhaphy from 1977 to 2022. Datapoints included demographics, past surgical history, indication for colonoscopy, delay to diagnosis, treatment, grade of injury, splenic artery embolisation location, splenic preservation (salvage), and mortality.ResultsThe 30 patients treated with splenic artery embolisation were of mean age 65 (SD 9) years and 67% female, with 83% avoiding splenectomy and 6.7% mortality. Splenic artery embolisation was proximal to the splenic hilum in 81%. The 163 patients treated with splenectomy were of mean age 65 (SD 11) years and 66% female, with 5.5% mortality. Three patients treated with splenorrhaphy of median age 60 (range 59–70) years all avoided splenectomy with no mortality. There was no difference in mortality between splenic artery embolisation and splenectomy cohorts (p = 0.81).ConclusionsSplenic artery embolisation is an effective treatment option in splenic injury due to colonoscopy. Given the known benefits of splenic salvage compared to splenectomy, including preserved immune function against encapsulated organisms, low cost, and shorter hospital length of stay, embolisation should be incorporated into treatment pathways for splenic injury due to colonoscopy in suitable patients.

show abstract

“…23 publications (5 case series of two or more patients and 18 singular case reports) were included of 30 individual patients primarily treated with splenic artery embolisation for splenic laceration after colonoscopy 27,30–51 . Individual patient data are shown in Supplementary Table and presented in comparison to splenectomy and splenorrhaphy in Table 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…23 publications (5 case series of two or more patients and 18 singular case reports) were included of 30 individual patients primarily treated with splenic artery embolisation for splenic laceration after colonoscopy. 27 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 Individual patient data are shown in Supplementary Table S1 and presented in comparison to splenectomy and splenorrhaphy in Table 1 . Most patients were asymptomatic and a only a minority (20%) of colonoscopies were interventional, including biopsy or polypectomy (Supplementary Table S1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%