CT as a first-line modality in elderly patients with stable blunt chest trauma

Plain Chest Film Versus Computed Tomography of the Chest as the Initial Imaging Modality for Blunt Thoracic Injury

BACKGROUND

While chest X-ray (CXR) is an efficient tool for expeditious detection of life-threatening injury, chest computed tomography (CCT) is more sensitive albeit with added time, cost, and radiation. Thus far, there is limited evidence and lack of consensus on the best imaging practices. We sought to determine the association between imaging modality and outcomes in isolated blunt thoracic trauma.

METHODS

The 2017-2020 TQIP database was queried for adult patients who sustained isolated blunt chest trauma and underwent chest imaging within 24 hours of admission. Patients who underwent CCT were 2:1 propensity-score-matched to those who underwent CXR. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), ICU admission, need for and days requiring mechanical ventilation, complications, and discharge location.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded 17 716 patients with CCT and 8861 with CXR. While bivariate analysis showed lower 24-hr (CCT .2% vs CXR .4%, P = .0015) and in-hospital mortality (CCT 1.2% vs CXR 1.5%, P = .0454) in the CCT group, there was no difference in survival probability between groups (P = .1045). A higher percentage of CCT patients were admitted to the ICU (CCT 26.9% vs CXR 21.9%, P < .0001) and discharged to rehab (CCT .8% vs CXR .5%, P = .0178).

DISCUSSION

CT offers no survival benefit over CXR in isolated blunt thoracic trauma. While CCT should be considered if clinically unclear, CXR likely suffices as an initial screening tool. These findings facilitate optimal resource allocation in constrained environments.

The sensitivity of chest X-ray (CXR) for the detection of significant thoracic injury in children exposed to blast

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic trauma is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in children exposed to blast and early recognition of these injuries is vital. While numerous studies have investigated the sensitivity of chest X-ray (CXR) for the detection of chest injury in blunt trauma, none have evaluated its performance in paediatric blast injury.

METHODS

CXR and Computed Tomography (CT) thorax findings were compared for 105 children who were injured by blast and presented to the UK Role 3 Hospital, Camp Bastion, Helmand Province, during the recent conflict in Afghanistan from 2011 to 2013. CXR performance was evaluated compared to the 'gold standard' of CT for the detection of significant thoracic injuries, defined as pneumothorax, haemothorax, aortic or great vessel injury, 2 or more rib fractures, ruptured diaphragm, sternal fracture, penetrating fragments and pulmonary contusion or laceration.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of CXR for the detection of significant injuries was: pneumothorax 43%, haemothorax 40%, contusion 44%, laceration 100%, blast lung 80% and subdermal metallic fragments 75%. CXR missed all cases of diaphragm injury, ≥2 rib fractures, clavicle fracture and pleural effusion, although numbers of each were small. Specificity for CXR injury detection was 94% for contusion and 93% for fragment, and 100% otherwise. The sensitivity and specificity of CXR for identifying an abnormality that would prompt CT imaging was 72% (95% CI 55-85%) and 82% (95% CI 70-90%).

CONCLUSIONS

CXR has a poor sensitivity for the identification of significant thoracic injury in children exposed to blast. We argue that, given the challenge of clinical assessment of injured children and the potential for serious adverse consequences of missed thoracic injuries, there should be a low threshold for the use of CT chest in the evaluation of children exposed to blast.