Which of the following would NOT be considered a major indication for trauma arteriography?

In the context of trauma arteriography, the procedure is primarily indicated for acute situations where there's a potential vascular injury that needs immediate evaluation. Major indications typically involve conditions that could lead to life-threatening situations, necessitating rapid intervention.

The presence of manifestations of shock, especially when accompanied by clinical signs of abdominal injury, is a critical indicator for performing trauma arteriography. It helps to assess for any vascular compromise which can lead to significant hemorrhage, requiring urgent management.

Differentiating between multiple abdominal injuries is another important indication for this imaging technique. In traumatic scenarios, understanding the full extent of injury can guide treatment decisions, especially if vascular compromise is suspected.

The clinical signs of delayed rupture also point to a need for arteriography since a delayed hemorrhage from an injury can occur even if initial assessments were normal. This highlights the dynamic nature of trauma and the importance of monitoring for complications.

In contrast, pain of a chronic nature would not be a major indication for trauma arteriography. Chronic pain is often associated with conditions that do not represent immediate threats to life or necessitate urgent intervention, making it unsuitable for this specific procedure aimed at acute trauma situations.