Background Non-operative management with Transcatheter arterial embolization(TAE) was the first line of treatment for severe blunt liver injury in hemodynamically stable patients, but in the case of hemodynamically unstable, Operative management(OM) was recommended. We evaluated the efficacy of TAE in our hospital where intervention radiology was available 24 hours a day if the patient responds to initial infusion therapy even unstable.Methods We conducted a retrospective study of severe blunt liver injury of AAST Organ Injury Scale(OIS) grade 3–5 transported to our hospital between 2005 and 2019. If the patient responded to initial infusion therapy, even though hemodynamically unstable(Shock Index ≧ 1), CT was taken and initial treatment was decided. We compared patients who underwent OM or TAE on initial treatment.Results 62 patients were included (8 OM, 54 TAE), with a mean ISS of 26.6, in hospital mortality of 6%(13% OM VS 6% TAE, p = 0.50), hemodynamically unstable of 35% (88% OM VS 28% TAE, p < 0.01) and Time from Door to start OM/TAE 81.8 min(120.0 OM VS 76.1 TAE, p = 0.02). Unstable patients who undergo TAE were associated with 7% in hospital mortality and 7% clnical failure. After logistic regression the choice of treatment was not a predictor of outcome, the predictor of in-hospital mortality death was GCS on arrival(OR0.48, P < 0.01), hemodynamically unstable was independent predictor of duration of ICU ≧ 7 days(OR 3.80, p = 0.05) and massive blood transfusion(OR 7.25, p = 0.01). the predictor of complication was OIS grade4-5(OR 6.61 p < 0.01).Conclusions The strategy of performing TAE even in the presence of hemodynamically unstable in a facility where TAE can be performed promptly was acceptable mortality and clinical failure. The choice of treatment did not affect the outcome, and hemodynamically unstable and OIS affected the prognosis.