BACKGROUND Endovascular therapy is effective for non-traumatic iliac arterial diseases. The role of endovascular surgery in traumatic iliac lesions is unclear. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes for open versus endovascular management of traumatic iliac injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS The National Trauma Data Bank was searched for patients from 2002to 2016 with iliac arterial injury. Patients were sorted by treatment modality (open versus endo) and mechanism (blunt versus penetrating) and matched using mangled extremity score variables. The proportion of patients undergoing amputation were compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS In the blunt group, 1550 (82%) had endovascular and 342 (18%) had open repair. Endovascular repair was associated with a significantly lower amputation rate than open repair (0.6% versus 3.6%, P = 0.015) despite higher incidence of concomitant injuries. Venous injury was more frequent in the open group (13.7% versus 1.8%, P < 0.001). Within the penetrating group, 209 (22%) had endovascular and 755 (78%) had open repair. Again endovascular repair was associated with a lower amputation rate (0% versus 5.1%, P = 0.004). Patients undergoing endovascular repair had more severe extremity/orthopedic injury, with venous injury again associated with open repair (48.5% versus 37.4%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Endovascular repair of iliac injuries was associated with a significantly lower rate of amputation than open surgery. Endovascular repair was associated with a higher incidence of several injuries, although open repair was associated with concomitant venous injury. Further work is required to delineate the benefit of endovascular intervention and role of venous injury in limb salvage.
Repair of the Iliac Arterial Injury in Trauma: An Endovascular Operation?