Experience with sliding-clip splenorrhaphy for splenic injury during radical nephrectomy

Abstract

Introduction: We report our experience with sliding-clip splenorrhaphy (SCS), a novel splenic conservation technique, for iatrogenic splenic injury (ISI) during a left radical nephrectomy (RN). We also reviewed the literature on ISI. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients who had RN between January 2005 and December 2013 at our institution. The technique used was similar to sliding-clip renorrhaphy. Our Medline literature identified articles containing "splenic injury during nephrectomy," "iatrogenic splenic injury." "iatrogenic splenectomy," and "splenorrhaphy." Our primary outcome measures included incidence of splenic injury and splenic conservation rate and splenectomy. Results: Among the 370 RN, 140 were left sided. ISI injury occurred in 6 left RN (incidence 1.6% for all nephrectomies, 4.2% for leftsided nephrectomies). All 6 cases had open procedure and for the left-sided procedure. Splenic conservation was attempted in 4 patients using SCS and 3 out of 4 were successfully repaired. Altogether 3 patients had splenectomy (incidence 0.8% for all nephrectomies, 2.1% for left-sided nephrectomies). Our literature review revealed that the incidence of iatrogenic splenectomy during left nephrectomy varies from 1.3% to 13.2%. Conclusions: SCS is an acceptable novel splenic conservation technique due to its ease of use and success in selected patients with ISI. There is little evidence on the true incidence of ISI especially on splenic conservation during nephrectomy. Every attempt at splenic conservation is likely to improve immediate-and long-term patient outcomes.

Iatrogenic splenic injury: review of the literature and medico-legal issues

“…In 1996, Cooper et al reported that 4.3% of left nephrectomies resulted in splenectomy [ 74 ]. In more recent papers, the rate was between 4.2% and 5.13% [ 7 , 75 ]. In the case of thoracoscopic spinal surgery, the spleen can be vulnerable to iatrogenic injury due to its proximity to the thoracolumbar junction [ 6 ].…”