Evidence Hub

Endovascular management of haemorrhage and vascular lesions in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries: a systematic review and clinical practice guideline update

Hans-Joachim Wagner, K. Goossen, P. Hilbert-Carius, Rainer Braunschweig, Daniela Kildal, D. Hinck, T. Albrecht, N. Könsgen

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, 2025

20 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Our aim was to update evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the inhospital endovascular management of haemorrhage and vascular lesions in patients with multiple and/or severe injuries based on current evidence. This guideline topic is part of the 2022 update of the German Guideline on the Treatment of Patients with Multiple and/or Severe Injuries. MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched to June 2021. Further literature reports were obtained from clinical experts. Randomised controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and comparative registry studies were included if they compared endovascular interventions for bleeding control such as embolisation, stent or stent-graft placement, or balloon occlusion against control interventions in patients with polytrauma and/or severe injuries in the hospital setting. The diagnosis of pelvic haemorrhage was added post-hoc as an additional clinical question. We considered patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, bleeding control, haemodynamic stability, transfusion requirements, complications, and diagnostic test accuracy. Risk of bias was assessed using NICE 2012 checklists. The evidence was synthesised narratively, and expert consensus was used to develop recommendations and determine their strength. Forty-three new studies were identified. Interventions covered were resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) (n = 20), thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) (n = 9…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 20 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free