Missed injuries in trauma patients: A literature review

Spectrum and detection of musculoskeletal findings on trauma-related CT torso examinations

This study aims (1) to evaluate the spectrum of musculoskeletal (MSK) findings detected on trauma-related torso CT exams performed in the emergency department and (2) to identify the findings of high clinical importance that are underreported. Following IRB approval, two fellowship-trained MSK radiologists independently reviewed 200 consecutive trauma CT torso examinations performed at a level 1 trauma center, focusing on MSK findings. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Findings were categorized as of high, moderate, or low clinical importance based on criteria established with an orthopedic trauma surgeon. Findings evident on only one series (scout, axial, or sagittal/coronal reformations) were documented. The consensus reading was compared to the final report. Unreported findings of high clinical importance were entered into our departmental QA system. Eighty-two percent (164/200) of the studies had at least one MSK finding. There were 433 total findings of varying importance and the overall detection rate was 61 % (266/433). The detection rate for high importance findings was 80 % (177/221) with the majority representing acute fractures (99 %). For findings of high clinical importance, the lowest detection rates were for fractures of the sternum, proximal humerus, and forearm. Of the high severity findings, 6.3 % (14/221) were detected only on sagittal or coronal reformatted or scout images. Twenty percent of musculoskeletal findings of high clinical importance on trauma-related CT torso exams were not reported. Fractures of the sternum, proximal humerus, and forearm were the most commonly missed fractures and review of scout and multiplanar reformations can increase detection.

Risk stratification by injury distribution in polytrauma patients - does the clavicular fracture play a role?

Background

Thoracic and extremity injuries are common in polytraumatized patients. The clavicle limits the upper thoracic cage and connects the body and upper extremities. It is easy to examine and is visible on standard emergency room radiographs. We hypothesize that clavicular fracture in polytrauma patients indicates the presence of further injuries of the upper extremities, head, neck and thorax.

Material and methods

Retrospective study including patients admitted between 2008 and 2012 to a level-I trauma center. Inclusion criteria: ISS > 16, two or more injured body regions, clavicular fracture. Control group: patients admitted in 2011, ISS > 16, two or more injured body regions, no clavicular fracture. Patient information was obtained from the patients’ charts; evaluation of radiographic findings was performed; scoring was based on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) and Injury Severity Score (ISS) AIS/ISS; data were analyzed using Pearson’s correlation and the Mann–Whitney U-test in SPSS (version 11.5.1); graphs were drawn using EXCEL®.

Results

Thirty-four patients with clavicular fracture (C+) and 40 without (C-) were included; the mean ISS was 25 (range 16–57), m = 70%, f = 30%; age 43.3 years (range 9–88); clavicular fractures were positively correlated with severe thoracic (p = 0.011, OR 4.5: KI 1.3–15.3), external (p < 0.001, OR 9.2: KI 2.7–30.9) and upper extremity injuries (p < 0.001, OR 33.2: KI 6.9–16.04 resp. p = 0.004, OR 12.5: KI 1.5–102.9). C + showed a lower head/neck AIS (p = 0.033), higher thorax AIS (p = 0.04), arm/shoulder AIS (p = 0.001) and external AIS (0.003) than C-. Mean hospital stay and ICU treatment time were longer in the C + group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.025 respectively).

Conclusion

A clavicular fracture can be diagnosed easily and may be used as a pointer for further thoracic and upper extremity injuries in polytrauma patients that might have been otherwise missed. Special attention should be paid on second and tertiary survey.

Incidence of delayed and missed diagnoses in whole-body multidetector CT in patients with multiple injuries after trauma

BACKGROUND

Whole-body CT (WBCT) is the imaging modality of choice during the initial diagnostic work-up of multiple injured patients in order to identify serious injuries and initiate adequate treatment immediately. However, delayed diagnosed or even missed injuries have been reported frequently ranging from 1.3% to 47%.

PURPOSE

To highlight commonly missed lesions in WBCT of patients with multiple injuries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 375 patients (age 42.8 ± 17.9 years, ISS 26.6 ± 17.0) with a WBCT (head to symphysis) were included. The final CT report was compared with clinical and operation reports. Discrepant findings were recorded and grouped as relevant and non-relevant to further treatment. In both groups, an experienced trauma radiologist read the CT images retrospectively, whether these lesions were missed or truly not detectable.

RESULTS

In 336 patients (89.6%), all injuries in the regions examined were diagnosed correctly in the final reports of the initial CT. Forty-eight patients (12.8%) had injuries in regions of the body that were not included in the CT. Fourteen patients (3.7%) had injuries that did not require further treatment. Twenty-five patients (6.7%) had injuries that required further treatment. With secondary interpretation, 85.4% of all missed lesions could be diagnosed in retrospect from the primary CT data-set. Small pancreatic and bowel contusions were identified as truly non-detectable.

CONCLUSION

In multiple traumas, only a few missed injuries in initial WBCT reading are clinically relevant. However, as the vast majority of these injuries are detectable, the radiologist has to be alert for commonly missed findings to avoid a delayed diagnosis.

Delayed diagnosis of hand injuries in polytrauma patients

Trauma patients are at high risk for delayed diagnosis of injuries, including those to the hand, with reports in the literature as high as 50%. As a result, patients may have prolonged disability and longer hospital stays with associated increased costs. Our objective was to elucidate risk factors for the delayed diagnosis of hand injuries. A review was performed from 2000 through 2009, assessing for age, sex, blood alcohol level, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), mechanism, injury type, length of stay, and timing of hand injury diagnosis. In this study, 36,568 patients were identified; 738 meeting criteria; 21.7% of patients had delayed diagnoses with 91.3% of patients diagnosed by the day after admission. Delayed diagnoses were more than 2 times higher for severely injured patients. Patients with delayed diagnoses had a lower GCS and a higher ISS and length of hospitalization. With a decreased GCS and elevated ISS, patients are at risk for delayed diagnoses of hand injuries. A focused tertiary survey is mandatory, particularly in patients with an altered mental status or with multiple injuries.

Delayed diagnosis of injury in survivors of the February 2009 crash of flight TK 1951

INTRODUCTION

On 25th February 2009, a Boeing 737 crashed nearby Amsterdam, leaving 126 victims. In trauma patients, some injuries initially escape detection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of Delayed Diagnosis of Injury (DDI) and the tertiary survey on the victims of a plane crash, and the effect of ATLS(®) implementation on DDI incidence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from all victims were analysed with respect to hospitalisation, DDI, tertiary survey, ISS, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), injuries (number and type) and emergency intervention. Clinically significant injuries were separated from non-clinically significant injuries. The data were compared to a plane crash in the UK (1989), which occurred before ATLS(®) became widely practiced.

RESULTS

All 126 victims of the Dutch crash were evaluated in a hospital; 66 were hospitalised with a total of 171 clinically significant injuries. Twelve (7%) clinically significant DDIs were found in 8 patients (12%). In 65% of all patients, a tertiary survey was documented. The incidence of DDI in patients with an ISS ≥ 16 (n=13) was 23%, vs. 9% in patients with ISS <16. Patients with >5 injuries had a DDI incidence of 25%, vs. 12% in patients with ≤ 5 injuries. Head injury patients had a DDI incidence of 19%, patients without head injury 10%. Fifty percent of patients who needed an emergency intervention (n=4) had a DDI; 3% of patients who did not need emergency intervention. Eighty-one survivors of the UK crash had a total of 332 injuries. DDIs were found in 30.9% of the patients. Of all injuries 9.6% was a DDI. The incidence of DDI in patients with >5 injuries was 5%, vs. 8% in those with ≤ 5 injuries.

CONCLUSION

DDI in trauma still happen. In this study the incidence was 7% of the injuries in 12% of the population. In one third of the patients no tertiary survey was documented. A high ISS, head injury, more than 5 injuries and an emergency intervention were associated with DDI. The DDI incidence in our study was lower than in victims of a previous plane crash prior to ATLS implementation.

Whole body imaging in the diagnosis of blunt trauma, ionizing radiation hazards and residual risk

Ever since the introduction of radiographic imaging, its utility in identifying injuries has been well documented and was incorporated in the workup of injured patients during advanced trauma life support algorithms [American College of Surgeons, 8th ed. Chicago, 2008]. More recently, computerized tomography (CT) has been shown to be more sensitive than radiography in the diagnosis of injury. Due to the increased use of CT scanning, concerns were raised regarding the associated exposure to ionizing radiation [N Engl J Med 357:2277-2284, 2007]. During the last several years, a significant amount of research has been published on this topic, most of it being incorporated in the BEIR VII Phase 2 report, published by the National Research Council of the National Academies [National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, 2006]. The current review will analyze the scientific basis for the concerns over the ionizing radiation associated with the use of CT scanning and will examine the accuracy of the typical advanced trauma life support work-up for diagnosis of injuries.

Accuracy of single-pass whole-body computed tomography for detection of injuries in patients with major blunt trauma

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced whole-body computed tomography (also called "pan-scanning") is considered to be a conclusive diagnostic tool for major trauma. We sought to determine the accuracy of this method, focusing on the reliability of negative results.

METHODS

Between July 2006 and December 2008, a total of 982 patients with suspected severe injuries underwent single-pass pan-scanning at a metropolitan trauma centre. The findings of the scan were independently evaluated by two reviewers who analyzed the injuries to five body regions and compared the results to a synopsis of hospital charts, subsequent imaging and interventional procedures. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the pan-scan for each body region, and we assessed the residual risk of missed injuries that required surgery or critical care.

RESULTS

A total of 1756 injuries were detected in the 982 patients scanned. Of these, 360 patients had an Injury Severity Score greater than 15. The median length of follow-up was 39 (interquartile range 7-490) days, and 474 patients underwent a definitive reference test. The sensitivity of the initial pan-scan was 84.6% for head and neck injuries, 79.6% for facial injuries, 86.7% for thoracic injuries, 85.7% for abdominal injuries and 86.2% for pelvic injuries. Specificity was 98.9% for head and neck injuries, 99.1% for facial injuries, 98.9% for thoracic injuries, 97.5% for abdominal injuries and 99.8% for pelvic injuries. In total, 62 patients had 70 missed injuries, indicating a residual risk of 6.3% (95% confidence interval 4.9%-8.0%).

INTERPRETATION

We found that the positive results of trauma pan-scans are conclusive but negative results require subsequent confirmation. The pan-scan algorithms reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of missed injuries, and they should not replace close monitoring and clinical follow-up of patients with major trauma.

Accuracy of single-pass whole-body computed tomography for detection of injuries in patients with major blunt trauma

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced whole-body computed tomography (also called "pan-scanning") is considered to be a conclusive diagnostic tool for major trauma. We sought to determine the accuracy of this method, focusing on the reliability of negative results.

METHODS

Between July 2006 and December 2008, a total of 982 patients with suspected severe injuries underwent single-pass pan-scanning at a metropolitan trauma centre. The findings of the scan were independently evaluated by two reviewers who analyzed the injuries to five body regions and compared the results to a synopsis of hospital charts, subsequent imaging and interventional procedures. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the pan-scan for each body region, and we assessed the residual risk of missed injuries that required surgery or critical care.

RESULTS

A total of 1756 injuries were detected in the 982 patients scanned. Of these, 360 patients had an Injury Severity Score greater than 15. The median length of follow-up was 39 (interquartile range 7-490) days, and 474 patients underwent a definitive reference test. The sensitivity of the initial pan-scan was 84.6% for head and neck injuries, 79.6% for facial injuries, 86.7% for thoracic injuries, 85.7% for abdominal injuries and 86.2% for pelvic injuries. Specificity was 98.9% for head and neck injuries, 99.1% for facial injuries, 98.9% for thoracic injuries, 97.5% for abdominal injuries and 99.8% for pelvic injuries. In total, 62 patients had 70 missed injuries, indicating a residual risk of 6.3% (95% confidence interval 4.9%-8.0%).

INTERPRETATION

We found that the positive results of trauma pan-scans are conclusive but negative results require subsequent confirmation. The pan-scan algorithms reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of missed injuries, and they should not replace close monitoring and clinical follow-up of patients with major trauma.

Incidence and predictors of missed injuries in trauma patients in the initial hot report of whole-body CT scan

BACKGROUND

Whole-body CT scan is the cornerstone of trauma-related injury assessment. Several lines of evidence indicate that significant number of injuries may remain undetected after the initial hot report of CT. Missed injuries (MI) represent an important issue in trauma patients, for they may increase morbidity, mortality and costs. The aim of this study was to examine incidence and predictors of MI in trauma patients undergoing whole-body CT scan.

METHODS

177 CT scan performed upon admission of trauma patients during year 2005 were reviewed by a radiologist blinded to patient's initial data. MI was defined as injuries not written in the initial report. Patients with and without MI were compared to determine predictors of MI by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

157 MI were diagnosed in 85 (47%) patients. MI was predominantly encoded AIS 2 (57%) or 3 (29%). Patients with MI had significantly higher SAPSII, higher ISS and were more frequently sedated. Age over 50 years (OR: 4.37, p=0.003) and ISS over 14 (OR: 4.17, p<0.0001) were independent predictors of MI. Median ISS after encoding MI was significantly higher than initial ISS (22 vs. 20 p<0.0001). After adjustment for severity, mortality and length of stay were not different between patients with or without MI.

CONCLUSION

Trauma patients, especially aged and severe, experienced a high rate of missed injuries in the initial hot report which appeared to be predominantly minor and musculoskeletal, advocating a CT scan second reading.

Association between a single-pass whole-body computed tomography policy and survival after blunt major trauma: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Single-pass, whole-body computed tomography (pan-scan) remains a controversial intervention in the early assessment of patients with major trauma. We hypothesized that a liberal pan-scan policy is mainly an indicator of enhanced process quality of emergency care that may lead to improved survival regardless of the actual use of the method.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with blunt trauma referred to a trauma center prior to (2000 to 2002) and after (2002 to 2007) the introduction of a liberal single-pass pan-scan policy. The overall mortality between the two periods was compared and stratified according to the availability and actual use of the pan-scan. Logistic regression analysis was employed to adjust mortality estimates for demographic and injury-related independent variables.

RESULTS

The study comprised 313 patients during the pre-pan-scan period, 223 patients after the introduction of the pan-scan policy but not undergoing a pan-scan and 608 patients undergoing a pan-scan. The overall mortality was 23.3, 14.8 and 7.9% (P < 0.001), respectively. By univariable logistic regression analysis, both the availability (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36 to 0.90) and the actual use of the pan-scan (OR 0.28, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.42) were associated with a lower mortality. The final model contained the Injury Severity Score, the Glasgow Coma Scale, age, emergency department time and the use of the pan-scan. 2.7% of the explained variance in mortality was attributable to the use of the pan-scan. This contribution increased to 7.1% in the highest injury severity quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a liberal pan-scan policy was associated with lower trauma mortality. The causal role of the pan-scan itself must be interpreted in the context of improved structural and process quality, is apparently moderate and needs further investigation with regard to the diagnostic yield and changes in management decisions. (The Pan-Scan for Trauma Resuscitation [PATRES] Study Group, ISRCTN35424832 and ISRCTN41462125).

Missed injuries in the era of the trauma scan

BACKGROUND

A rapid computed tomography technique or "trauma scan" (TS) provides high-resolution studies of the head, cervical spine, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. We sought to determine whether TS has decreased missed injuries. A previous study of TS found a 3% missed rate.

METHODS

After institutional review board approval, trauma patients from January 2001 through December 2008 were reviewed for delayed diagnosis (DD) of injury to the head, cervical spine, chest, abdomen, or pelvis. Missed extremity injuries were excluded. Injury Severity Score, length of stay, type of injury, outcomes, and days to detection were captured.

RESULTS

Of 26,264 patients reviewed, 90 patients had DD, with an incidence of 0.34%. DD most commonly presented on day 2. Injuries included 16 bowel/mesentery, 12 spine, 11 pelvic, 8 spleen, 6 diaphragm, 5 clavicle, 4 scapula, 4 cervical spine, 4 intracranial, 4 sternum, 3 maxillofacial, 3 liver, 2 heart/aorta, 2 vascular, 2 urethra/bladder, 2 pneumothorax, and 2 pancreas/common bile duct. DD resulted in 1 death, 6 prolonged intensive care unit stays, 19 operative interventions, and 38 additional interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

TS is an effective way of evaluating trauma patients for intracranial, cervical spine, chest, abdomen, and pelvic injuries that have the potential to impact morbidity and mortality. The incidence of injuries missed in these crucial areas has been reduced at our institution by the use of this radiographic modality. The most common missed injury remains bowel, and so a high index of suspicion and the tertiary survey must remain a mainstay of therapy.

Trauma management incorporating focused assessment with computed tomography in trauma (FACTT) - potential effect on survival

Background

Immediate recognition of life-threatening conditions and injuries is the key to trauma management. To date, the impact of focused assessment with computed tomography in trauma (FACTT) has not been formally assessed. We aimed to find out whether the concept of using FACTT during primary trauma survey has a negative or positive effect on survival.

Methods

In a retrospective, multicentre study, we compared our time management and probability of survival (Ps) in major trauma patients who received FACTT during trauma resuscitation with the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society (DGU). FACTT is defined as whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) during primary trauma survey. We determined the probability of survival according to the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS), the Revised Injury Severity Classification score (RISC) and the standardized mortality ratio (SMR).

Results

We analysed 4.817 patients from the DGU database from 2002 until 2004, 160 (3.3%) were from our trauma centre at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) and 4.657 (96.7%) from the DGU group. 73.2% were male with a mean age of 42.5 years, a mean ISS of 29.8. 96.2% had suffered from blunt trauma. Time from admission to FAST (focused assessment with sonography for trauma)(4.3 vs. 8.7 min), chest x-ray (8.1 vs. 16.0 min) and whole-body CT (20.7 vs. 36.6 min) was shorter at the LMU compared to the other trauma centres (p < 0.001). SMR calculated by TRISS was 0.74 (CI95% 0.40-1.08) for the LMU (p = 0.24) and 0.92 (CI95% 0.84-1.01) for the DGU group (p = 0.10). RISC methodology revealed a SMR of 0.69 (95%CI 0.47-0.92) for the LMU (p = 0.043) and 1.00 (95%CI 0.94-1.06) for the DGU group (p = 0.88).

Conclusion

Trauma management incorporating FACTT enhances a rapid response to life-threatening problems and enables a comprehensive assessment of the severity of each relevant injury. Due to its speed and accuracy, FACTT during primary trauma survey supports rapid decision-making and may increase survival.

Physical examination is a poor screening test for abdominal-pelvic injury in adult blunt trauma patients

BACKGROUND

To determine if physical examination can reliably detect or exclude abdominal or pelvic injury in adult trauma activation patients.

METHODS

Trauma registry and medical record data were retrospectively reviewed for all adult blunt trauma patients with Glasgow coma scale score>8, from 6/30/05 to 12/31/06. Attending surgeons' dictated admission history and physical examination reports were individually reviewed. Patients' subjective reports of abdominal pain were recorded as present or absent. Exam findings of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis were each separately recorded as positive or negative, and were compared with findings on a subsequent objective evaluation of the abdomen (OEA). "Clinically significant" injuries were defined as those that would change patient management.

RESULTS

One thousand six hundred sixty-three patients were studied. Of patients with a negative abdominal exam, 10% had a positive OEA. When abdominal pain was absent, and exam of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis was normal, OEA was positive in 7.6%, and 5.7% had a clinically significant injury. While a positive abdominal exam was predictive of a positive OEA (P<0.01), a negative exam, even when broadened (pain, lower ribs, abdomen, pelvis) did not exclude significant injuries.

CONCLUSION

Ten percent of trauma activation patients with a negative abdominal exam have occult abdominal/pelvic injuries. Even when exam of the lower ribs, abdomen, and pelvis are all negative and abdominal pain is absent, 5.7% have occult injuries that would change management. OEA should be used liberally for adult blunt trauma activation patients regardless of physical exam findings, to avoid missing clinically significant injuries.