Comparison of Conventional Angiographic Findings between Trauma Patients with or without Runoff

Objective: To compare the conventional angiographic findings in extremity trauma patients with or without runoff. Methods: This was cross-sectional study including all the patients with extremity trauma who underwent conventional angiography during the 2 year period from 2011 to 2013 in Angiography departments of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Mechanism of trauma, type of injury and angiographic findings were recorded in a questionnaire for each patient. After completion of treatment and discharge, the treatment type was added. The characteristics as well as clinical findings were compared between those who were diagnosed to have arterial runoff ad those who did not. Results: One hundred and forty eight traumatic patients including 15 female with age range of 11-82 years and 133 men ranging from 25 to 40 years were enrolled. Abnormal angiographic findings were provided in 99 (66.9%) patients including cutoff with distal runoff (n=60, 60.6% of abnormalities), cut off without distal runoff (n=21, 21.2%) and spasm (n=14, 14.1%) and other findings (n=4, 4%). Fifty one cases were treated under open surgery and amputation of traumatic limb was done for 13 patients. Amputation rate was higher in patients with cutoff and without runoff than those with cutoff and runoff (33.3% vs. 6.78%; p=0.002). Conclusion: Causes and types of traumatic arterial injury in our study were different with other reports. It was shown that angiographic findings were less important in prognosis and management of patients. Patients with spasm in angiographic findings had a better prognosis than other patients and mostly did not need any vascular surgery. The presence or absence of a distal run off in primary angiographic findings can have a predictive value in the final amputation rate.