Management of renal injury in a UK major trauma centre

Abstract

Introduction This study reviews the type, severity, management and follow-up of renal trauma presenting to a major trauma centre in the northwest of England in the four years following inception of the major trauma centre. Given the recent introduction of major trauma centres nationally, research is needed within every specialty to ensure that the centralisation of services benefits all patients affected by these changes. Methods Patients presenting to Aintree University Hospital with renal trauma between June 2012 and June 2016 were identified using the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database. The data gathered retrospectively for each patient included mechanism of injury, injury severity score, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grading, management of injury, and follow-up. Results Out of a total of 2595 trauma patients, 33 renal injuries were identified. The 31 patients who received imaging were classified according to AAST grading, with 8 Grade I (25.8%), 4 Grade II (12.9%), 8 Grade III (25.8%), 4 Grade IV (12.9%), and 7 Grade V (22.6%) injuries. Twenty-five out of the 30 surviving patients received conservative treatment, three patients received angioembolisation (AE), one patient received a laparotomy with renal suturing, and one patient required a nephrectomy. Of these 30 surviving patients, seven received urology follow-up in clinic (23%). Conclusion The findings appear to support the growing trend towards the conservative management of high-grade renal injuries, and provide further evidence for the value of AE in renal trauma. The success of AE in this study appears to support the centralisation of services in renal trauma; however, the low nephrectomy rate could be interpreted as suggestive of the opposite. The study revealed that improvements to follow-up are needed, and that further research should seek to inform the optimal radiological follow-up of high-grade renal injury.