Sonography in blunt abdominal trauma: a preliminary progress report

Sono-starters: A qualitative study of pioneers in the field of point-of-care ultrasound

Objectives

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) within emergency medicine (EM) was a new field that has since developed into a robust discipline through the efforts of early EM POCUS pioneers. This study explored the experiences that led to POCUS pioneers' success. These data can inform emerging fields of study including non-EM specialties adopting POCUS as well as other new subspecialties within medicine.

Methods

This was a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with physician pioneers in the field of EM POCUS. EM POCUS pioneers were defined as early key contributors to the field of EM POCUS and were identified using combined author networks and purposive, stratified sampling with a snowball sampling technique. A thematic analysis of interviews was performed using a modified grounded theory approach with a constructivist-interpretivist paradigm.

Results

Twelve physicians were interviewed in this study. We identified four major themes: career motivators, barriers encountered, promoters of success, and advancement of the field. Career motivators included the need for representation and the ability to impact a new and growing field. Barriers encountered included discouragement by other colleagues, political battles, lack of funding, and rudimentary technology. Participants felt their career success was attributed to guidance from mentors, demonstration of initiative, work ethic, and skills in active listening. Participants felt the field advanced through the creation of national organizations, publication of training and credentialing guidelines, generation of research, and investment into the next generation of POCUS leaders.

Conclusions

This study identified several key themes in EM POCUS pioneers' careers including motivators, barriers, and methods used to overcome obstacles. Based on these data, we recommend a comprehensive set of strategies to support the advancement of an emerging field. These include early content exposure, mentorship, funding, research and industry collaboration, diversity, national organization involvement, and investment into future leaders.

Application of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma in the Intensive Care Unit

The Extended-Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (E-FAST) allows clinicians to rapidly diagnose traumatic thoracoabdominal injuries at the bedside without ionizing radiation. It has high specificity and is extremely useful as an initial test to rule in dangerous diagnoses such as hemoperitoneum, pericardial effusion, hemothorax, and pneumothorax. Its moderate sensitivity means that it should not be used alone as a tool to rule out dangerous thoracoabdominal injuries. In patients with a concerning mechanism or presentation, additional imaging should be obtained despite a negative FAST examination.

The use of ultrasound in the acute setting: Lessons learned after 30 years

This article describes the key events in the evolution of the surgeon's use of ultrasound for the evaluation of patients. The lessons learned may be relevant in the future as the issues encountered with the adoption of ultrasound by surgeons may be revisited.

Hemoperitoneum identified by focused assessment with sonography for trauma following cardiopulmonary resuscitation

It is generally recognized that lives are saved by administering high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to patients in cardiac arrest. A focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examination is an effective and non-invasive method for detecting rare complications of CPR, such as hemorrhage from abdominal visceral injury. We report the case of a 56-year-old female suffering from intra-abdominal hemorrhage caused by a liver laceration following CPR. The hemoperitoneum was diagnosed by a FAST examination. Although severe complications of CPR are rare, they can be easily detected with the use of a FAST examination. A FAST examination should be considered as a post-resuscitation approach to assess for life-threatening complications in all patients following cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Performance of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma Following Resuscitative Thoracotomy for Traumatic Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) for traumatic cardiac arrest, focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) is often used to look for intraperitoneal fluid. These findings can help determine whether abdominal exploration is warranted once return of spontaneous circulation is achieved; however, the diagnostic accuracy of FAST in this clinical scenario has yet to be evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of FAST in identifying intra-abdominal hemorrhage following RT.

METHODS

We performed a 3-year retrospective study at a high-volume level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2016. We included patients who underwent RT in the Emergency Department. All FAST examinations were performed by non-radiologists. Operative findings, computed tomography reports, diagnostic peritoneal aspirate (DPA) results, and autopsy findings were used as reference standards to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of the FAST.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients met our inclusion criteria. The median age was 35 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 23-53), 86.1% were male, and 60.1% sustained blunt trauma. Most patients suffered severe injuries with a median injury severity score of 27 (IQR: 18-38). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of FAST for identifying intra-abdominal hemorrhage were 66.0%, 84.8%, 68.6%, 83.2%, and 78.5%, respectively. Among the 107 patients with a negative FAST, 22 (20.6%) underwent DPA, which was positive in 5 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

FAST can be utilized in the diagnostic workup of trauma patients after RT. In patients with a positive FAST, exploratory laparotomy is warranted, whereas other diagnostic adjuncts such as DPA or mandatory abdominal exploration may be considered in patients with a negative FAST.

A meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of chest ultrasound for the diagnosis of occult penetrating cardiac injuries in hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating thoracic trauma

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) to determine the diagnostic accuracy of chest ultrasound (US) compared with a pericardial window (PW) for the diagnosis of occult penetrating cardiac injuries in hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating thoracic trauma.

METHODS

A literature search in five databases identified relevant articles for inclusion in this SR and MA. Studies were eligible if they evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of chest US, compared with a PW, for the diagnosis of occult penetrating cardiac injuries in hemodynamically stable patients presenting with penetrating thoracic trauma. Two investigators independently assessed articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria and selected studies for final analysis. Methodological quality was evaluated using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. We performed a MA of binary diagnostic test accuracy within the bivariate mixed-effects logistic regression modeling framework.

RESULTS

We included five studies in our SR and MA. These studies included a total of 556 trauma patients. The MA found that, compared with PW, the US was 79% sensitive and 92% specific for detecting occult penetrating cardiac injuries in hemodynamically stable patients. The presence of a concomitant left hemothorax was frequent in patients with false-negative results.

CONCLUSION

This SR and MA found that, compared with PW, US was 79% sensitive and 92% specific for detecting occult penetrating cardiac injuries in hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating thoracic trauma. Caution interpretation of pericardial US results is suggested in the presence of left hemothorax. In these cases, a second diagnostic test should be performed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, level II.

Some recollections of early work with bedside ultrasound in emergency medicine: the first 10 years

The early history of ultrasound in emergency medicine has remained for the most part undocumented up to this time. This piece represents personal recollections of the evolution of point-of-care ultrasound from its origins in the late 1980s in the United States. A description of ultrasound equipment, resistance to widespread implementation, the evolution of training, and fellowship programs with subsequent publications and committee developments are examined in detail. Special attention to the advancement of trauma ultrasound is also examined from the viewpoint of an early adopter. The purpose of this manuscript is to recognize the persistence and dedication of some of the early founders of emergency ultrasound, thus gaining a deeper appreciation for the scope of practice and meaningful use that emergency physicians are now using on a daily basis.

Initial focused assessment with sonography in trauma versus initial CT for patients with haemodynamically stable torso trauma

OBJECTIVE

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) examination is a widely known initial evaluation for patients with trauma. However, it remains unclear whether FAST contributes to patient survival in patients with haemodynamically stable trauma. In this study, we compared in-hospital mortality and length of stay between patients undergoing initial FAST vs initial CT for haemodynamically stable torso trauma.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using data from 264 major emergency hospitals in the Japan Trauma Data Bank between 2004 and 2016. Patients were included if they had torso trauma with a chest or abdomen abbreviated injury scale score of ≥3 and systolic blood pressure of ≥100 mm Hg at hospital arrival. Eligible patients were divided into those who underwent initial FAST and those who underwent initial CT. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for in-hospital mortality and multivariable linear regression for length of stay were performed to compare the initial FAST and initial CT groups with adjustment for patient backgrounds while also adjusting for within-hospital clustering using a generalised estimating equation.

RESULTS

There were 9942 patients; 8558 underwent initial FAST and 1384 underwent initial CT. Multivariable logistic regression showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between the initial FAST and initial CT groups (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.99, p=0.10). Multivariable linear regression revealed that the initial FAST group had a significantly longer length of stay than the initial CT group (difference: 3.5 days; 95% CI 1.0 to 5.9, p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the initial FAST and initial CT groups for patients with haemodynamically stable torso trauma. Initial CT should be considered in patients with haemodynamically stable torso trauma.

Point-of-care ultrasonography for diagnosing thoracoabdominal injuries in patients with blunt trauma

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care sonography (POCS) has emerged as the screening modality of choice for suspected body trauma in many emergency departments worldwide. Its best known application is FAST (focused abdominal sonography for trauma). The technology is almost ubiquitously available, can be performed during resuscitation, and does not expose patients or staff to radiation. While many authors have stressed the high specificity of POCS, its sensitivity varied markedly across studies. This review aimed to compile the current best evidence about the diagnostic accuracy of POCS imaging protocols in the setting of blunt thoracoabdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of POCS for detecting and excluding free fluid, organ injuries, vascular lesions, and other injuries (e.g. pneumothorax) compared to a diagnostic reference standard (i.e. computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), thoracoscopy or thoracotomy, laparoscopy or laparotomy, autopsy, or any combination of these) in patients with blunt trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July 2017) and Ovid Embase (1974 to July 2017), as well as PubMed (1947 to July 2017), employing a prospectively defined literature and data retrieval strategy. We also screened the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and BIOSIS for potentially relevant citations, and scanned the reference lists of full-text papers for articles missed by the electronic search. We performed a top-up search on 6 December 2018, and identified eight new studies which may be incorporated into the first update of this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We assessed studies for eligibility using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. We included either prospective or retrospective diagnostic cohort studies that enrolled patients of any age and gender who sustained any type of blunt injury in a civilian scenario. Eligible studies had to provide sufficient information to construct a 2 x 2 table of diagnostic accuracy to allow for calculating sensitivity, specificity, and other indices of diagnostic test accuracy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of reports using a prespecified data extraction form. Methodological quality of individual studies was rated by the QUADAS-2 instrument (the revised and updated version of the original Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies list of items). We calculated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI), tabulated the pairs of sensitivity and specificity with CI, and depicted these estimates by coupled forest plots using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5). For pooling summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, and investigating heterogeneity across studies, we fitted a bivariate model using Stata 14.0.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 studies with 8635 participants in this review. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.81) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.98). Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were estimated at 18.5 (95% CI 10.8 to 40.5) and 0.27 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.37), respectively. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies, and the reported accuracy of POCS strongly depended on the population and affected body area. In children, pooled sensitivity of POCS was 0.63 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.77), as compared to 0.78 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.84) in an adult or mixed population. Associated specificity in children was 0.91 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.96) and in an adult or mixed population 0.97 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). For abdominal trauma, POCS had a sensitivity of 0.68 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.75) and a specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.97). For chest injuries, sensitivity and specificity were calculated at 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.00). If we consider the results of all 34 included studies in a virtual population of 1000 patients, based on the observed median prevalence (pretest probability) of thoracoabdominal trauma of 28%, POCS would miss 73 patients with injuries and falsely suggest the presence of injuries in another 29 patients. Furthermore, in a virtual population of 1000 children, based on the observed median prevalence (pretest probability) of thoracoabdominal trauma of 31%, POCS would miss 118 children with injuries and falsely suggest the presence of injuries in another 62 children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients with suspected blunt thoracoabdominal trauma, positive POCS findings are helpful for guiding treatment decisions. However, with regard to abdominal trauma, a negative POCS exam does not rule out injuries and must be verified by a reference test such as CT. This is of particular importance in paediatric trauma, where the sensitivity of POCS is poor. Based on a small number of studies in a mixed population, POCS may have a higher sensitivity in chest injuries. This warrants larger, confirmatory trials to affirm the accuracy of POCS for diagnosing thoracic trauma.

Early scaphoid fractures are better diagnosed with ultrasonography than X-rays: A prospective study over 114 patients

PURPOSE

Wrist has a complex anatomy and undergoes complex injuries. Scaphoid fracture is one of such injuries. It is the most common fracture in carpal bone. Most of the scaphoid fractures are missed on initial X-rays. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered as a gold standard for diagnosing scaphoid fractures. Ultrasonography (USG) is emerging as a good alternative to make an early diagnosis of scaphoid fractures. Our aim is to throw light upon the role of USG in detection of scaphoid fractures.

METHODS

The study was centered upon 114 patients in the age range 10-65 years, with traumatic wrist injury and were clinically suspected to have scaphoid fractures. Patient with non-traumatic history, bilateral wrist injury and late presentation were excluded. X-rays, USG using high frequency probe and MRI were done for all patients. MRI was considered to be the gold standard test. Patients were followed up at 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 114 patients, X-ray could diagnose scaphoid fractures in 48 patients, 30 of which were confirmed by MRI. USG results were positive in 74 patients, of which MRI was positive in 67 patients. The accuracy of scaphoid fracture detection with USG was 98.04% in comparison to X-ray (20.58%), which was statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

USG provides a more accurate and reliable method of making an early diagnosis of scaphoid fracture than X-rays. It is non-invasive, non-expensive and allows better visualisation of cortical disruption.

FAST in the deployed military setting

INTRODUCTION

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) is historically an effective method of assessing the patient in the trauma bay in order to aid decision-making and optimise patient outcomes. However, in the UK civilian practice, the use of FAST may decline given a recent change in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance as a result of improvement in CT availability and resuscitation techniques.

METHOD

In the Role 3 Medical Treatment Facility, Camp Bastion, 187 patients with trauma who received FAST in the trauma bay in 2014 were reviewed to determine the accuracy of FAST in the deployed environment.

RESULTS

The data demonstrates the sensitivity and specificity of FAST to be 75% and 99.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that FAST is accurate on operations. FAST is provided by the integrated radiologist as part of damage control radiology, which gives the team leader rapid diagnostic information to improve decision-making and ultimately patient outcomes. CT is heavily utilised in civilian practice; however, the military operates in a different environment often with multiple casualties and limited access to CT, as a result, portable ultrasound will continue to be a valuable tool on operations if used properly. The next challenge is to develop and maintain this high diagnostic accuracy in future deployments where the memories of our prior success may fade.

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma: a review of concepts and considerations for anesthesiology

The use of point-of-care ultrasound in trauma provides diagnostic clarity and routinely influences management. A scanning protocol known as the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) has been widely adopted by trauma providers of all specialties. The FAST exam addresses a broad array of pathologic conditions capable of causing instability, including hemoperitoneum, hemopericardium, hemothorax, and pneumothorax. The exam is an integral component to the primary assessment of injured patients and an iconic application of point-of-care ultrasound.This review article aims to summarize the application of the FAST exam with special consideration, where relevant, to anesthesiologists. The scope of the FAST exam, technical considerations, and clinical decision-making in trauma are explored.

Senior general surgery residents can be trained to perform focused assessment with sonography for trauma patients accurately

PURPOSES

Researchers studying trauma have found that physicians are able to perform a focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) with minimal training and achieve ideal accuracy. However, there are currently no consensus or standard guidelines regarding the performance of this assessment. The aim of our study was to clarify the value of FAST performed by well-qualified senior general surgery residents in cases of suspected blunt abdominal trauma, which presents an important diagnostic problem in emergency departments.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study in the emergency department (ED) of our hospital performed from January 2011 to September 2013. Patients were included if they (1) had undergone a FAST examination performed by qualified residents and (2) had received subsequent formal radiographic or surgical evaluations. The results were compared against subsequent surgical findings or formal Department of Radiology reference standards.

RESULTS

Among the 438 patients enrolled, false-negative results were obtained in 8 and false-positive results in 5. Only one patient was missed and required laparotomy to repair a small intestine perforation. The sensitivity and specificity were 87 and 99%, respectively; the accuracy was 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

Senior general surgery residents can be trained to perform accurate FAST examinations on trauma patients.

FAST for blunt abdominal trauma: Correlation between positive findings and admission acid-base measurement

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine any association between positive findings in ultrasonography examination and initial BD value with regard to diagnosis of intra-abdominal bleeding following blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

A prospective, multi-center study of consecutive adult patients was performed from April to September 2015. Demographics, initial vital signs and arterial BD were evaluated with respect to presence of any association with intra-abdominal bleeding and in-hospital mortality. FAST study was performed to find intra-abdominal bleeding. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves tested the ability of BD to identify patients with intra-abdominal hemorrhage and probable mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 879 patients were included in final analysis. The mean (SD) age was 36.68 (15.7) years and 714 patients (81.2%) were male. According to multivariable analysis, statistically significant association was observed between negative admission BD and both intra-abdominal bleeding (OR 3.48, 95% CI 2.06-5.88, p<0.001) and in-hospital mortality (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.49-1.63, p<0.001). ROC curve analysis demonstrated sensitivity of 92.7% and specificity of 22.1% for the best cut-off value of BD (-8mEq/L) to diagnose internal hemorrhage. Further, a cut-off value of -7mEq/L demonstrated significant predictive performance, 94.8% sensitivity and 53.6% specificity for in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that arterial BD is an early accessible important marker to identify intra-abdominal bleeding, as well as to predict overall in-hospital mortality in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

The 100 most cited manuscripts in emergency abdominal surgery: A bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

The number of citations a scientific article receives provides a good indication of its impact within any given field. This bibliometric analysis aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles in Emergency Abdominal Surgery (EAS), to highlight key areas of interest and identify those that have most significantly shaped contemporary clinical practice in this newly evolving surgical specialty. This is of increasing relevance as concerns grow regarding the variable and suboptimal outcomes in Emergency General Surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Thomson Reuters Web of Science database was used to search using the terms [Emergency AND Abdom* AND Surg*] to identify all English language, full manuscripts. Results were ranked according to citation number. The top 100 articles were further analysed by subject, author, journal, year of publication, institution, and country of origin.

RESULTS

The median (range) citation number of the top 100 out of 7433 eligible papers was 131 (1569-97). The most cited paper (by Goldman et al., Massachusetts General Hospital, New England Journal of Medicine; 1569 citations) focused on cardiac risk stratification in non-cardiac surgery. The Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care published the most papers and received most citations (n = 19; 2954 citations. The majority of papers were published by centres in the USA (n = 52; 9422 citations), followed by the UK (n = 13; 1816 citations). The most common topics of publication concerned abdominal aneurysm management (n = 26) and emergency gastrointestinal surgery (n = 26).

CONCLUSION

Vascular surgery, risk assessment and gastrointestinal surgery were the areas of focus for 59% of the contemporary most cited emergency abdominal surgery manuscripts. By providing the most influential references this work serves as a guide to what makes a citable emergency surgery paper.

Trinity:

Hypotension is a common endpoint to many disease processes and can be evaluated with ultrasonography at the bedside. This ultrasound protocol can be used to examine the key organs involved in maintaining a blood pressure and the areas within the torso where fluid can collect. Systematically investigating these areas can provide the health care team with key information concerning the hypotensive state. This protocol examines the torso from the geometric perspective of a cross (Trinity).

Screening Ultrasound in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Ultrasound is used worldwide to evaluate patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Sometimes referred to as an extension of the physical exam, ultrasound can rapidly help distinguish patients with injury requiring computerized tomography (CT) or surgery (typically 5%-10%) from those with no abdominal injury (> 90%). Ultrasound has several advantages in the setting of trauma. It is portable, integrates easily into the resuscitation of trauma victims without causing delay in therapy, is noninvasive, and has no associated morbidity. Limitations of ultrasound include its dependence on operator skill and technique, poor image quality in patients with morbid obesity or extensive subcutaneous gas, limited visualization of the retroperitoneum, and less reliable localization of visceral injury compared to CT. Successful use of abdominal ultrasound in the setting of trauma can be maximized with adequate sonographer training, appreciation of technical limitations, and adherence to an appropriate trauma ultrasound protocol.

Surgical wound assessment by sonography in the prediction of surgical wound infections

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are important sources of morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and readmissions, so they have become a major economic burden. We hypothesized that surgical wound assessment by sonography (SWATS) used at the bedside would detect wound fluid collections and that the presence of such collections would predict SSI better than standard clinical examination. If so, SWATS might be used to indicate early intervention that could prevent SSI morbidity.

METHODS

A prospective, single-institution observational study was conducted on adult inpatients following open abdominal surgery for trauma, gastrointestinal pathology, or biliary pathology at high risk (>5%) for SSI using traditional wound classifications. After informed consent was obtained, SWATS was performed using a smartphone-based ultrasound system on postoperative Day 2 to 4 and again before discharge or at postoperative Day 30, whichever came first. Primary treating physicians delivered standard wound care and were blinded to SWATS. SSI was diagnosed if treatment was implemented for suspected or documented wound infection by the treating physician. Results were analyzed by χ test and two-sample pooled variance t test where appropriate, with significance set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients were studied. Nineteen patients had peri-incisional fluid collections found by SWATS. Eight of these patients went on to develop an SSI. SSI was significantly associated with the presence of fluid collections on SWATS (p = 0.009). SWATS had a sensitivity of 72.7% (0.43-0.92), a specificity of 71.1% (0.62-0.77), a positive predictive value of 42.1% (0.25-0.53), and a negative predictive value of 90.0% (0.79-0.97).

CONCLUSION

SWATS has a high negative predictive value that may allow it be an effective screening tool for developing SSI in high-risk surgical wounds. SWATS has the potential to be a useful and cost-effective adjunct to the clinician by objectively suggesting need for early therapy. Further study with larger sample sizes and randomized, SWATS-based interventions are required to validate this small study and determine its place in clinical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic study, level IV.

Ultrasound: the triage tool in the emergency department: using ultrasound first

Ultrasound in the emergency department has long been recognized as a powerful screening and diagnostic tool for both physicians and radiologists. In the emergency department, since time is of the essence, it becomes a critical tool in triaging patients. Over the years, ultrasound has gained several advantages over other modalities because of its non-ionizing radiation, portability, accessibility, non-invasive method and simpler learning curve. As a result, ultrasound has become one of the most frequently used diagnostic tools in the emergency department by non-radiologists. The value of ultrasound is implemented in every acute ailment in the emergency department such as trauma, acute abdomen, acute pelvic pain, acute scrotal pain, appendicitis in children and acute deep venous thrombosis. Our objective is to discuss the benefit of using ultrasound as the primary modality for each of these diseases.

A Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma Performed by Emergency Medicine and Radiology Residents

BACKGROUND

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) is a method for prompt detection of the abdominal free fluid in patients with abdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to compare the diagnostic accuracy of FAST performed by emergency medicine residents (EMR) and radiology residents (RRs) in detecting peritoneal free fluids.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients triaged in the emergency department with blunt abdominal trauma, high energy trauma, and multiple traumas underwent a FAST examination by EMRs and RRs with the same techniques to obtain the standard views. Ultrasound findings for free fluid in peritoneal cavity for each patient (positive/negative) were compared with the results of computed tomography, operative exploration, or observation as the final outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were included in the final analysis. Good diagnostic agreement was noted between the results of FAST scans performed by EMRs and RRs (κ = 0.701, P < 0.001), also between the results of EMRs-performed FAST and the final outcome (κ = 0.830, P < 0.0010), and finally between the results of RRs-performed FAST and final outcome (κ = 0.795, P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted between EMRs- and RRs-performed FASTs regarding sensitivity (84.6% vs 84.6%), specificity (98.4% vs 97.6%), positive predictive value (84.6% vs 84.6%), and negative predictive value (98.4% vs 98.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Trained EMRs like their fellow RRs have the ability to perform FAST scan with high diagnostic value in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

Point-of-Care Clinical Ultrasound for Medical Students

PURPOSE

Our institution has recently implemented a point-of-care (POC) ultrasound training program, consisting of an e-learning course and systematic practical hands-on training. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the learning outcome of this curriculum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

16 medical students with no previous ultrasound experience comprised the study group. The program covered a combination of 4 well-described point-of-care (POC) ultrasound protocols (focus assessed transthoracic echocardiography, focused assessment with sonography in trauma, lung ultrasound, and dynamic needle tip positioning for ultrasound-guided vascular access) and it consisted of an e-learning course followed by 4 h of practical hands-on training. Practical skills and image quality were tested 3 times during the study: at baseline, after e-learning, and after hands-on training.

RESULTS

Practical skills improved for all 4 protocols; after e-learning as well as after hands-on training. The number of students who were able to perform at least one interpretable image of the heart increased from 7 at baseline to 12 after e-learning, p<0.01, and to all 16 students after hands-on-training, p<0.01. The number of students able to cannulate an artificial vessel increased from 3 to 8 after e-learning and to 15 after hands-on training.

CONCLUSION

Medical students with no previous ultrasound experience demonstrated a considerable improvement in practical skill after interactive e-learning and 4 h of hands-on training.

Do we really rely on fast for decision-making in the management of blunt abdominal trauma?

INTRODUCTION

The Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma examination (FAST) is currently taught and recommended in the ATLS(®), often as an addendum to the primary survey for patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Although it is non-invasive and rapidly performed at bedside, the utility of FAST in blunt abdominal trauma has been questioned. We designed this study to examine our hypothesis that FAST is not an efficacious screening tool for identifying intra-abdominal injuries.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with confirmatory diagnosis of blunt abdominal injuries with CT and/or laparotomy for a period of 1.5 years (from 7/2009 to 11/2010). FAST was performed by ED residents and considered positive when free intra-abdominal fluid was visualized. Abdominal CT, or exploratory laparotomy findings were used as confirmation of intra-abdominal injury.

RESULTS

A total of 1671 blunt trauma patients were admitted to and evaluated in the Emergency Department during a 1½ year period and 146 patients were confirmed intra-abdominal injuries by CT and/or laparotomy. Intraoperative findings include injuries to the liver, spleen, kidneys, and bowels. In 114 hemodynamically stable patients, FAST was positive in 25 patients, with a sensitivity of 22%. In 32 hemodynamically unstable patients, FAST was positive in 9 patients, with a sensitivity of 28%. A free peritoneal fluid and splenic injury are associated with a positive FAST on univariate analysis, and are the independent predictors for a positive FAST on multiple logistic regression.

CONCLUSION

FAST has a very low sensitivity in detecting blunt intraabdominal injury. In hemodynamically stable patients, a negative FAST without a CT may result in missed intra-abdominal injuries. In hemodynamically unstable blunt trauma patients, with clear physical findings on examination, the decision for exploratory laparotomy should not be distracted by a negative FAST.

Clinical applicability of real-time, prehospital image transmission for FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma)

We evaluated a real-time, prehospital ultrasound image transmission system for use in focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST). The wireless, real-time ultrasound image transmission system comprised an ultrasound scanner with a convex abdominal transducer and a notebook computer connected to a 3 G wireless network for video data transmission. In our simulation experiment, ultrasonography was performed by emergency medical technicians (EMTs) on a human body phantom with simulated haemoperitoneum. Transmitted ultrasound video clips were randomly rearranged and presented to emergency physicians to make a diagnosis of haemoperitoneum. A total of 21 ultrasound video clips was used and 13 emergency physicians participated in the study. The sensitivity and specificity were 90.0% (95% Confidence Interval, CI, 83.5-94.6) and 85.3% (95% CI 78.4-90.7) respectively, and the accuracy of detecting abnormal ultrasound results was 87.7% (95% CI 83.8-91.6). Diagnosis of hemoperitonuem in trauma patients by an emergency physician based on the transmitted video images of FAST performed by an EMT is feasible, and has an accuracy of about 88%.

Bedside ultrasonography by emergency physicians for anterior talofibular ligament injury

Objective:

Our objective was to study the accuracy of emergency physician (EP) performed bedside ultrasonography (BUS) in patients with suspected anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) injury.

Materials and Methods:

After a 6-h training program, from January to December 2011, an EP used BUS to prospectively evaluate patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected ATFL injury. Then, patients underwent ankle X-ray and Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging. Outcome was determined by official radiology reports of the MR imaging. BUS and MR imaging results were compared using Chi-square testing.

Results:

Of the 65 enrolled patients, 30 patients were BUS positive. Of these, MR imaging results agreed with the BUS findings in 30 patients. In 35 cases, BUS was negative, and 33 of these were corroborated by MR imaging. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and negative likelihood ratio for BUS were 93.8%, 100%, 100%, 94.3%, and 0.06%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of BUS was not statistically different from MR imaging (K = 0.938, P = 0.001).

Conclusion:

BUS for the diagnosis of ATFL injury is another application of BUS in the ED. EPs can diagnose ATFL injury using BUS with a high degree of accuracy.

Sonographic Detection of Abdominal Free Fluid: Emergency Residents vs Radiology Residents

Background

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) has become a part of initial examinations in trauma care at emergency departments (ED).

Objectives

The goal of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of FASTs performed by emergency residents (ER) in detection of abdominal free fluid following blunt trauma.

Materials and Methods

In this study, the reports of ERs performing FASTs on 286 admitted patients following blunt trauma were compared with those of radiology residents (RR) in relation to presence of abdominal free fluid. In addition, the reports of the two resident groups were compared with the final abdominal outcome, based on the results of abdominal computed tomography (CT) and clinical follow up.

Results

The ERs had reported abdominal free fluid in 20 (6.9%) patients while RRs performing FAST had positive results in 22 (7.6%) patients. The reports of FASTs revealed significant correlation between the two resident groups (P < 0.001). ERs performing FASTs had 90% sensitivity and 98.5% specificity in comparison to RRs sonography reports. Furthermore, ER-performed FASTs had 96.5% accuracy in relation to final outcome.

Conclusions

Following training, ED residents can perform FAST with high accuracy and specificity, similar to RR residents, in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

False-negative FAST examination: associations with injury characteristics and patient outcomes

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) is widely used for evaluating patients with blunt abdominal trauma; however, it sometimes produces false-negative results. Presenting characteristics in the emergency department may help identify patients at risk for false-negative FAST result or help the physician predict injuries in patients with a negative FAST result who are unstable or deteriorate during observation. Alternatively, false-negative FAST may have no clinical significance. The objectives of this study are to estimate associations between false-negative FAST results and patient characteristics, specific abdominal organ injuries, and patient outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients who presented to an urban Level I trauma center between July 2005 and December 2008 with blunt abdominal trauma, a documented FAST, and pathologic free fluid as determined by computed tomography, diagnostic peritoneal lavage, laparotomy, or autopsy. Physicians blinded to the study purpose used standardized abstraction methods to confirm FAST results and the presence of pathologic free fluid. Multivariable modeling was used to assess associations between potential predictors of a false-negative FAST result and false-negative FAST result and adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

During the study period, 332 patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 32 years (interquartile range 23 to 45 years), 67% were male patients, the median Injury Severity Score was 27 (interquartile range 17 to 41), and 162 (49%) had a false-negative FAST result. Head injury was positively associated with false-negative FAST result (odds ratio [OR] 4.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5 to 15.7), whereas severe abdominal injury was negatively associated (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5). Injuries to the spleen (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.66), liver (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.61), and abdominal vasculature (OR 0.17; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38) were also negatively associated with false-negative FAST result. False-negative FAST result was not associated with mortality (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.9), prolonged ICU length of stay (relative risk 0.88; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12), or total hospital length of stay (relative risk 0.92; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12). However, patients with false-negative FAST results were substantially less likely to require therapeutic laparotomy (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.52).

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe head injuries and minor abdominal injuries were more likely to have a false-negative than true-positive FAST result. On the other hand, patients with spleen, liver, or abdominal vascular injuries are less likely to have false-negative FAST examination results. Adverse outcomes were not associated with false-negative FAST examination results, and in fact patients with false-negative FAST result were less likely to have a therapeutic laparotomy. Further studies are needed to assess the strength of these findings.

Does this adult patient have a blunt intra-abdominal injury?

CONTEXT

Blunt abdominal trauma often presents a substantial diagnostic challenge. Well-informed clinical examination can identify patients who require further diagnostic evaluation for intra-abdominal injuries after blunt abdominal trauma.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess the precision and accuracy of symptoms, signs, laboratory tests, and bedside imaging studies to identify intra-abdominal injuries in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a structured search of MEDLINE (1950-January 2012) and EMBASE (1980-January 2012) to identify English-language studies examining the identification of intra-abdominal injuries. A separate, structured search was conducted for studies evaluating bedside ultrasonography.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies of diagnostic accuracy for intra-abdominal injury that compared at least 1 finding with a reference standard of abdominal computed tomography, diagnostic peritoneal lavage, laparotomy, autopsy, and/or clinical course for intra-abdominal injury. Twelve studies on clinical findings and 22 studies on bedside ultrasonography met inclusion criteria for data extraction.

DATA EXTRACTION

Critical appraisal and data extraction were independently performed by 2 authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The prevalence of intra-abdominal injury in adult emergency department patients with blunt abdominal trauma among all evidence level 1 and 2 studies was 13% (95% CI, 10%-17%), with 4.7% (95% CI, 2.5%-8.6%) requiring therapeutic surgery or angiographic embolization of injuries. The presence of a seat belt sign (likelihood ratio [LR] range, 5.6-9.9), rebound tenderness (LR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.8-24), hypotension (LR, 5.2; 95% CI, 3.5-7.5), abdominal distention (LR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.9-7.6), or guarding (LR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.3-5.9) suggest an intra-abdominal injury. The absence of abdominal tenderness to palpation does not rule out an intra-abdominal injury (summary LR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.80). The presence of intraperitoneal fluid or organ injury on bedside ultrasound assessment is more accurate than any history and physical examination findings (adjusted summary LR, 30; 95% CI, 20-46); conversely, a normal ultrasound result decreases the chance of injury detection (adjusted summary LR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.19-0.34). Test results increasing the likelihood of intra-abdominal injury include a base deficit less than -6 mEq/L (LR, 18; 95% CI, 11-30), elevated liver transaminases (LR range, 2.5-5.2), hematuria (LR range, 3.7-4.1), anemia (LR range, 2.2-3.3), and abnormal chest radiograph (LR range, 2.5-3.8). Symptoms and signs may be most useful in combination, particularly in identification of patients who do not need further diagnostic workup.

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside ultrasonography has the highest accuracy of all individual findings, but a normal result does not rule out an intra-abdominal injury. Combinations of clinical findings may be most useful to determine which patients do not require further evaluation, but the ideal combination of variables for identifying patients without intra-abdominal injury requires further study.

Beyond focused assessment with sonography for trauma: ultrasound creep in the trauma resuscitation area and beyond

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of ultrasound for the management of the injured patient has expanded dramatically in the last decade. The focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) has become one of the fundamental skills incorporated into the initial evaluation of the trauma patient. However, there are significant limitations of this diagnostic modality as initially described. Novel ultrasound examinations of the injured patient, although useful, must also be considered carefully.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increasing evidence supports the high specificity of FAST for detecting a pericardial effusion and intra-abdominal free fluid (hemorrhage) in the patient with blunt injury. On the other hand, a so-called negative FAST result still requires further diagnostic work up given its low sensitivity. Similarly, the role of FAST in penetrating abdominal trauma appears to be limited because of lower sensitivity for visceral injury compared to other modalities. Extended FAST (EFAST), that adds a focused thoracic examination, has high accuracy for the detection of pneumothorax comparable to computed tomographic scan, the significance of which is not currently known. Finally, the utility of intensivist-performed ultrasound in the ICU is expanding to limited hemodynamic assessment and facilitation of central venous catheter placement.

SUMMARY

The indications for FAST and additional ultrasound studies in the injured patient continue to evolve. Application of sound clinical evidence will avoid unsubstantiated indications for ultrasound to creep into our clinical practice.

Diagnostic accuracy of focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examinations performed by emergency medical technicians

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examinations when used by emergency medical technicians (EMTs) to detect the presence of free abdominal fluid.

METHODS

Six level 1 EMTs (similar to intermediate EMTs in the United States) who worked at a tertiary emergency department in Korea underwent an educational program consisting of two one-hour didactic lectures that included the principles of ultrasonography, the anatomy of the abdomen, and two hours of hands-on practice. After this educational session, the EMTs performed FAST examinations on a convenience sample of patients from July 1 to October 5, 2009. These patients also received an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan regardless of their chief complaints. The CT findings served as the definitive standard and were interpreted routinely and independently by emergency radiologists who were blinded to the study protocol. In addition, the EMTs were blinded to the CT findings. A positive CT finding was defined as the presence of free fluid, as interpreted by the radiologist. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Informed consent was obtained from all participating patients.

RESULTS

Among the 1,060 eligible patients with abdominal CT scans, 403 patients were asked to participate in the study, and 240 patients agreed. Of these 240 patients, 80 (33.3%) had results showing the presence of free fluid. Fourteen patients had a significant amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, 15 had a moderate amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, and 51 had a minimal amount of peritoneal cavity fluid. Compared with the CT findings, the diagnostic performance of the FAST examination had a sensitivity of 61.3% (95% CI, 50.3%-71.2%), specificity of 96.3% (95% CI, 92.1%-98.3%), positive predictive value of 89.1% (95% CI, 77.0%-95.4%), and negative predictive value of 83.2% (95% CI, 76.9%-88.2%). For a significant or moderate amount of peritoneal cavity fluid, the sensitivity was considerably higher (86.2%).

CONCLUSION

EMTs in Korea showed a high diagnostic performance that was comparable to that of surgeons and physicians when detecting peritoneal cavity free fluid in a Korean emergency department setting. The validity of FAST examinations in prehospital care situations should be investigated further.

An overview of emergency ultrasound in the United States

BACKGROUND

As emergency ultrasound use explodes around the world, it is important to realize the path its development has taken and learn from trials and tribulations of early practitioners in the field.

METHODS

Approaches to education, scanning, documentation, and organization are also described.

RESULTS

Machines have reduced in price and once purchased further material costs are low. Staffing costs in terms of training, etc have yet to be assessed, but indications from elsewhere are that these are low. Length of stay in the emergency department dramatically decreases, thus increasing patient satisfaction while maintaining an even higher standard of care.

CONCLUSION

Emergency screening ultrasound is now a nationally accepted tool for the rapid assessment of the emergency patient.

Validation of nurse-performed FAST ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting to Emergency Departments (EDs) with abdominal trauma benefit from FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma). Not all doctor members of the trauma team are credentialed in FAST; therefore occasionally no one is available in the hospital to undertake a FAST. Hence, the aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of nurse-performed FAST as a practical alternative where suitably trained doctors are not available.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of a convenience sample of patients with multisystem trauma in whom abdominal injury was clinically suspected. Senior nurses trained in FAST performed and reported FAST scans for each patient. Accuracy of nurse-performed FAST was determined by comparing results with computerised tomography (CT) scan or operation report.

RESULTS

242 indicated nurse-performed FAST scans were included in the study. Nurse-performed FAST demonstrated sensitivity of 84.4% (95% CI 72.1-92.2) and specificity of 98.4% (CI 94.9-99.6), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 94.2% (CI 83.1-98.5) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.3% (91.0-97.7). Overall accuracy of nurse-performed FAST for the detection of free fluid was 95.0% (95% CI 91.3-97.3).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that, in a convenience sample of injured patients, nurse-performed FAST achieved similar accuracy to previously published results of doctor-performed FAST. Future studies with greater patient numbers would be valuable.

Ultrasound in trauma

Point-of-care ultrasound is well suited for use in the emergency setting for assessment of the trauma patient. Currently, portable ultrasound machines with high-resolution imaging capability allow trauma patients to be imaged in the pre-hospital setting, emergency departments and operating theatres. In major trauma, ultrasound is used to diagnose life-threatening conditions and to prioritise and guide appropriate interventions. Assessment of the basic haemodynamic state is a very important part of ultrasound use in trauma, but is discussed in more detail elsewhere. Focussed assessment with sonography for Trauma (FAST) rapidly assesses for haemoperitoneum and haemopericardium, and the Extended FAST examination (EFAST) explores for haemothorax, pneumothorax and intravascular filling status. In regional trauma, ultrasound can be used to detect fractures, many vascular injuries, musculoskeletal injuries, testicular injuries and can assess foetal viability in pregnant trauma patients. Ultrasound can also be used at the bedside to guide procedures in trauma, including nerve blocks and vascular access. Importantly, these examinations are being performed by the treating physician in real time, allowing for immediate changes to management of the patient. Controversy remains in determining the best training to ensure competence in this user-dependent imaging modality.

Diffusion and practice of ultrasound in emergency medicine departments in Italy

INTRODUCTION

This paper reports data from a cognitive survey on the diffusion, practice and organization of ultrasound (US) in emergency medicine departments (EMDs) in Italy. The study was carried out by the Emergency Medicine Section of the Italian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (SIUMB) in collaboration with the Italian Society for Emergency Medicine and Urgent Care (SIMEU).

METHODS

We created a questionnaire with 10 items, relating to 4 thematic areas. The questionnaires were administered from September 2007 to February 2008, by email, telephone or regular mail. In August 2008 the data were subjected to nonparametric statistical analysis (Spearman's Rho and Pearson's chi-square - software SPSS).

RESULTS

We analyzed 170 questionnaires from the EMDs of all Italian regions. A US scanner is present in 64.7% of the ERs, emergency US (E-US) is practiced only in 47.6% of the ERs, and only in 24% of these more than 60% of the ER team members have training in US. The diffusion of US in other operative units of the EMDs ranges from 8.2% to 26.5%.

DISCUSSION

The presence of a US scanner in the ER is essential for the practice and training and is correlated with the level of the EMD. The use of US appears to be less common in less equipped hospitals, regardless of the size of the ER and the availability of radiological services. Wider diffusion of US and greater integration with other services for the installment of the required equipment is to be hoped for.

Prehospital and Emergency Department Ultrasound in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Blunt abdominal trauma is a challenging aspect of trauma management. Early detection has a major impact on patient outcome. In contrast to physical examination, computed tomography is known to be a sensitive and specific test for blunt abdominal injuries. However, it is time-consuming and thus contraindicated in hemodynamically unstable patients. Therefore, focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) offers a fast and easily applicable screening method to identify patients for urgent laparotomy without any further diagnostics. FAST detects, with high sensitivity, intraperitoneal fluid that accumulates in dependent areas indicating blunt abdominal trauma. FAST has been established as a gold standard early screening method for blunt abdominal trauma when performing trauma management in the emergency department (ED) based on the Advanced Trauma Life Support(®) algorithm. The development of hand-held ultrasound devices facilitated the introduction of FAST into prehospital trauma management. It was demonstrated that prehospital FAST (p-FAST) can be performed with high sensitivity and specificity, and can lead to significant changes in prehospital trauma therapy and management. Standardized training with both theoretical and hands-on modules is mandatory in order to gain the skills required to perform FAST or p-FAST well.

Renal trauma

Urinary tract injury occurs in 10% of all abdominal trauma patients, and the kidney is the most commonly injured organ in the urinary tract. CT with contrast enhancement is the modality of choice for cross-sectional imaging of renal trauma because it quickly and accurately can demonstrate injury to the renal parenchyma, renal pedicles, and associated abdominal or retroperitoneal organs. This article reviews the mechanism, clinical features, imaging modalities, and CT imaging findings according to the classification of the renal trauma. Trauma to underlying abnormal kidneys, iatrogenic renal injuries, and complications of renal trauma are reviewed also.

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma: the FAST scan

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma or focused abdominal sonography for trauma — the FAST scan, has become a useful modality for the initial evaluation of patients with blunt abdominal trauma. The technique is used to identify free fluid in the abdomen and pelvis and to detect the presence of a pericardial effusion. FAST can be performed by any trained individual, not necessarily a sonographer or radiologist, aiding in the immediate availability of this technique in the emergency situation. We will discuss the applications and sensitivity of this technique in trauma and review the potential pitfalls and limitations which need to be understood if this technique is to be safely applied. The use of FAST for the detection of pneumothoraces in trauma and other advances in FAST scanning, such as scoring systems and paediatric FAST are also reviewed.

The utility of focused assessment with sonography for trauma as a triage tool in multiple-casualty incidents during the second Lebanon war

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) as a triage tool in multiple-casualty incidents (MCIs) for a single international conflict.

METHODS

The charts of 849 casualties that arrived at our level 1 trauma referral center were reviewed. Casualties were initially triaged according to the Injury Severity Score at the emergency department gate. Two-hundred eighty-one physically injured patients, 215 soldiers (76.5%) and 66 civilians (23.5%), were admitted. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma was performed in 102 casualties suspected to have an abdominal injury. Sixty-eight underwent computed tomography (CT); 12 underwent laparotomy; and 28 were kept under clinical observation alone. We compared FAST results against CT, laparotomy, and clinical observation records.

RESULTS

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma results were positive in 17 casualties and negative in 85. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of FAST were 75%, 97.6%, 88.2%, 94.1%, and 93.1%, respectively. A strong correlation between FAST and CT results, laparotomy, and clinical observation was obtained (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In a setting of a war conflict-related MCI, FAST enabled immediate triage of casualties to laparotomy, CT, or clinical observation. Because of its moderate sensitivity, a negative FAST result with strong clinical suspicion demands further evaluation, especially in an MCI.