Nonselective versus Selective Angioembolization for Trauma Patients with Pelvic Injuries Accompanied by Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Angioembolization has emerged as an effective therapeutic approach for pelvic hemorrhages; however, its exact effect size concerning the level of embolized artery remains uncertain. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect size of embolization-related pelvic complications after nonselective angioembolization compared to that after selective angioembolization in patients with pelvic injury accompanying hemorrhage. Materials and Methods: Relevant articles were collected by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases until 24 June 2023. Meta-analyses were conducted using odds ratios (ORs) for binary outcomes. Quality assessment was conducted using the risk of bias tool in non-randomized studies of interventions. Results: Five studies examining 357 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Embolization-related pelvic complications did not significantly differ between patients with nonselective and selective angioembolization (OR 1.581, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.592 to 4.225, I2 = 0%). However, in-hospital mortality was more likely to be higher in the nonselective group (OR 2.232, 95% CI 1.014 to 4.913, I2 = 0%) than in the selective group. In the quality assessment, two studies were found to have a moderate risk of bias, whereas two studies exhibited a serious risk of bias. Conclusions: Despite the favorable outcomes observed with nonselective angioembolization concerning embolization-related pelvic complications, determining the exact effect sizes was limited owing to the significant risk of bias and heterogeneity. Nonetheless, the low incidence of ischemic pelvic complications appears to be a promising result.

Keywords

• pelvic injury
• hemorrhage
• angioembolization
• meta-analysis
• systematic review