Surgical outcomes and complications trauma-related solid organ resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trauma-related resections of solid organs, particularly the spleen and kidneys, are often necessitated in hemodynamically unstable patients. However, these interventions are associated with significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024614171). Databases were searched for studies published between 2014 and 2024. Eligible studies reported outcomes of adult trauma patients undergoing surgical resection of solid organs (spleen, kidney, liver, bladder). Data extraction included baseline characteristics, surgical details, and postoperative complications. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 1.0 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Fifteen studies comprising 50,537 patients were included. Splenectomy was the most frequently performed resection, followed by nephrectomy. Infectious complications were the most common adverse events postoperatively, particularly pneumonia and sepsis following splenectomy. Hemorrhagic complications and thromboembolic events were also observed. Pooled analysis showed no significant difference in hospital length of stay between resected and control groups (SMD=0.38 days; 95% CI: –5.28 to 6.04; I²=94%). Mortality odds were higher in the resection group (OR=1.42; 95% CI: 0.81 to 2.46), though not statistically significant (I²=49%). Trauma-related splenectomy and nephrectomy are associated with considerable risk of infectious and hemorrhagic complications and may confer higher but statistically non-significant mortality risk. These findings underscore the importance of organ-preserving approaches in trauma care and highlight the need for vigilant postoperative management in patients undergoing emergency solid organ resections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".