Article Abstract

High grade renal trauma management: a survey of practice patterns and the perceived need for a prospective management trial

Authors: Rachel A. Moses, Ross E. Anderson, Sorena Keihani, James M. Hotaling, Raminder Nirula, Daniel J. Vargo, Jeremy B. Myers


Background: To evaluate the current practice patterns of practitioners managing high grade renal trauma and determine perceived need for a prospective trial on the management of renal trauma.
Methods: We distributed an electronic survey to members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) and The Society of Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons (GURS). The survey evaluated demographics, interventional radiology (IR) access, and renal trauma management. Descriptive statistics were utilized to analyze participants’ responses.
Results: A total of 253 practitioners responded (age 48.4±10.4 years). The majority were acute care/trauma surgeons (ACS/TS) (63.2%), followed by urologists (34.4%) practicing at level 1 trauma centers (80.6%) in 39 US states. Most participants were in practice >10 years (62.8%); and had completed an ACS/TS (53.8%), or trauma/reconstructive urology (25.7%) fellowship. Ninety-five percent (241/253) found value in renal preservation with 74% utilizing IR embolization in the last year. However, there was wide variation in threshold for angiography, low rates of renal repair (24%) or packing (20%) and half reported performing a nephrectomy within the prior year. More than 80% believed there was value in a prospective trial to evaluate a protocol to decrease nephrectomy rates in renal trauma management.
Conclusions: The majority of respondents had access to IR, reported comfort in renorrhaphy, and valued renal preservation. There was variation in thresholds for bleeding intervention, and nephrectomy was still a common management strategy. There is great interest among trauma surgeons and urologists for a prospective trial of renal trauma management aimed at decreasing nephrectomy when possible.