Blunt Abdominal Trauma Patients: Can Organ Injury Be Excluded without Performing Computed Tomography?

Age-specific assessment of initial hemoglobin levels and shock index for predicting life-saving interventions in pediatric blunt liver and spleen injuries

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of combining initial hemoglobin levels with the shock index for predicting the need for life-saving interventions (LSI) in pediatric patients with blunt liver and spleen injuries (BLSI), specifically tailored to different age groups. This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients with BLSI in Japan. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) were used to assess predictive accuracy. The study included 1,370 patients. LSI was required in 59 of 247 (23.9%) aged 1 to 6 years, 100 of 402 (24.9%) aged 7 to 12 years, and 125 of 297 (42.1%) patients aged 13 to 16 years. Within each specific age group, the predictability was categorized as fair and appeared higher than that of the entire cohort or when using either parameter alone. Notably, in the 1 to 6-year age group, the combined values showed the highest predictability, which was statistically superior to the shock index alone (AUROC of 0.770 vs. 0.671, P = 0.025). Tailoring initial hemoglobin levels and shock index to specific age groups enhances predictability of LSI in pediatric BLSI, showing a fair level of predictive accuracy.

Computed tomography benefits and cost in hemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma at an Egyptian University Hospital

Background

Trauma is a significant cause of mortality, especially among individuals aged between 15 and 44 years, with a substantial burden falling on economically active populations. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bear the burden of trauma-related deaths, accounting for over 90 % globally. In Egypt, trauma rates are increasing, primarily due to road traffic crashes (RTC), affecting males disproportionately. Blunt abdominal trauma, often caused by RTC, can lead to missed intra-abdominal injuries (IAIs) due to atypical symptoms. Computed Tomography (CT) offers high sensitivity and specificity in detecting IAIs, but concerns about cost and radiation exposure exist.

Methodology

This study investigates the roles of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) and CT in managing blunt abdominal trauma. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on hemodynamically stable patients. Data included patient demographics, trauma details, healthcare decisions, costs, and outcomes.

Results

Computed tomography significantly reduced unnecessary laparotomies (12.3% vs. 24.8 %, p = 0.001), shortened hospital stays (4.83±0.71 days vs. 6.15±1.28 days, p = 0.005), and reduced ICU admissions (8 vs. 32, p = 0.023) compared to FAST alone. Overall costs were lower in the CT & FAST Group ($2055.95 vs. $3488.7, p = 0.0001), with no significant difference in missed IAIs.

Conclusion

This study highlights the limitations of relying solely on FAST for IAIs and underscores the value of CT in guiding healthcare decisions. Incorporating CT led to reduced negative laparotomies, shorter hospital stays, and fewer ICU admissions. While CT incurs initial costs, its long-term benefits outweigh expenditures, particularly in LMICs. This study provides insights into optimizing diagnostic approaches for blunt abdominal trauma in low-resource settings.

Does Size Matter? A Prospective Study on the Feasibility of Using a Handheld Ultrasound Device in Place of a Cart-Based System in the Evaluation of Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

As emergency physicians are looking at handheld devices as alternatives to the traditional, cart-based systems, concerns center around whether they are forsaking image quality for a lower price point and whether the handheld can be trusted for medical decision making.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the feasibility of using a handheld ultrasound device in place of a cart-based system during the evaluation of trauma patients using the Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of adult trauma patients who received a FAST examination as part of their evaluation. A FAST examination was performed using a cart-based machine and a handheld device. The results of the examinations were compared with computed tomography imaging. Images obtained from both ultrasound devices were reviewed by an expert for image quality.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean (SD) time to perform a FAST examination using the handheld device was 307.3 (65.3) s, which was significantly less (p = 0.002) than the 336.1 (86.8) s with the cart-based machine. There was strong agreement between the examination results of the handheld and cart-based devices and between the handheld and computed tomography. Image quality scores obtained with the handheld device were lower than those from the cart-based system. Most operators and reviewers agreed that the images obtained from the handheld were adequate for medical decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Data support that it is feasible to use the handheld ultrasound device for evaluation of the trauma patient in place of the cart-based system.

Role of Serial Phlebotomy in the Management of Blunt Solid Organ Injury in Adults

BACKGROUND

The management of blunt spleen and liver trauma has become increasingly nonoperative. There is no consensus on timing or duration of serial hemoglobin and hematocrit monitoring in this patient population.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the clinical utility of serial hemoglobin and hematocrit monitoring. We hypothesized that most interventions occur early in the hospital course, based on hemodynamic instability or physical examination findings rather than serial monitoring.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult trauma patients with blunt spleen or liver injury from November 2014 through June 2019 at our Level II trauma center. Interventions were classified as no intervention, surgical intervention, angioembolization, or packed red blood cell transfusion. Demographics, length of stay, total blood draws, laboratory values, and clinical triggers preceding intervention were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients were studied, of whom 73 (51%) received no intervention, 47 (33%) received an intervention within 4 hr of presentation, and 23 (16%) had interventions beyond 4 hr. Of these 23 patients, 13 received an intervention based on phlebotomy results alone. Most of these patients (n = 12, 92%) received blood transfusion without further intervention. Only one patient underwent operative intervention based on serial hemoglobin results on hospital day 2.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with these injury patterns either require no intervention or declare themselves promptly after arrival. Serial phlebotomy after initial triage and intervention may add little value in the management of blunt solid organ injury.

Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST)

The main cause of death in traumas is hypovolemic shock. Physical examination is limited to detect hemopericardium, hemoperitoneum, and hemopneumothorax. Computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for traumatic injury evaluation. However, CT is not always available, is more expensive, and there are transportation issues, especially in hemodynamically unstable patients. In this scenario, a rapid, reproducible, portable, and noninvasive method such as ultrasound emerged, directed for detecting hemopericardium, hemoperitoneum, and hemopneumothorax, in a "point of care" modality, known as the focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) protocol. With decades of experience, spread worldwide, and recommended by the most prestigious trauma care guidelines, FAST is a bedside ultrasound to be performed when accessing circulation issues of trauma patients. It is indicated to hemodynamically unstable patients with blunt abdominal trauma, with penetrating trauma of the thoracoabdominal transition (where there is doubt of penetrating the abdominal cavity) and for any patient with the cause of the instability unknown. There are four regions to be examined in the traditional FAST protocol: pericardium (to detect cardiac tamponade), right upper abdominal quadrant, left upper abdominal quadrant, and pelvis (to detect hemoperitoneum). The called extended FAST (e-FAST) protocol also searches the pleural spaces for hemothorax and pneumothorax. It is important to know the false positives and false negatives of the protocol, as well as its limitations. FAST/e-FAST protocol is designed to provide a simple "yes or no" answer regarding the presence of bleeding. It is not intended to quantify the bleeding nor evaluate organ lesions due to its limited accuracy for these purposes. Moreover, the amount of bleeding and/or the identification of organ lesions will not change patient's management: Hemodynamically unstable patients with positive FAST must go to the operating room without delay. CT should be considered for hemodynamically stable patients.

Predictors of transfer from a remote trauma facility to an urban level I trauma center for blunt splenic injuries: a retrospective observational multicenter study

Background

The decision-making for admission versus emergent transfer of patients with blunt splenic injuries presenting to remote trauma centers with limited resources remains a challenge. Although splenectomy is standard for hemodynamically unstable patients, the specific criterion for non-operative management continues to be debated. Often, lower-level trauma centers do not have interventional radiology capabilities for splenic artery embolization, leading to transfer to a higher level of a care. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify specific characteristics of patients with blunt splenic injuries used for admittance or transfer at a remote trauma center.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed to examine the management of splenic injuries at a mountainous and remote Level III trauma center. Trauma patients ≥ 18 years who had a blunt splenic injury and initially received care at a Level III trauma center prior to admittance or transfer were included. Data were collected over 4.5 years (January 1, 2016 – June 1, 2020). Patients who were transferred out in > 24 h were excluded. Patient demographics, injury severity, spleen radiology findings, and clinical characteristics were compared by decision to admit or transfer to a higher level of care ≤ 24 h of injury. Results were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher’s exact, or Wilcoxon tests. Multivariable logistic models were used to identify predictors of transfer.

Results

Of the 73 patients included with a blunt splenic injury, 48% were admitted and 52% were transferred to a Level I facility. Most patients were male (n = 58), were a median age of 26 (21–42) years old, most (n = 62) had no comorbidities, and 47 had been injured from a ski/snowboarding accident. Compared to admitted patients, transferred patients were significantly more likely to be female (13/38 vs. 3/36, p = 0.007), to have an abbreviated injury scale score ≥ 3 of the chest (31/38 vs. 7/35, p = 0.002), have a higher injury severity score (16 (16–22) vs. 13 (9–16), p = 0.008), and a splenic injury grade ≥ 3 (32/38 vs. 12/35, p < 0.001). After adjustment, splenic injury grade ≥ 3 was the only predictor of transfer (OR: 12.1, 95% CI: 3.9–37.3, p < 0.001). Of the 32 transfers with grades 3–5, 16 were observed, and 16 had an intervention. Compared to patients who were observed after transfer, significantly more who received an intervention had a blush on CT (1/16 vs. 7/16, p = 0.02) and a higher median spleen grade of 4 (3–5) vs. 3 (3–3.5), p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Our data suggest that most patients transferred from a remote facility had a splenic injury grade ≥ 3, with concomitant injuries but were hemodynamically stable and were successfully managed non-operatively. Stratifying by spleen grade may assist remote trauma centers with refining transfer criteria for solid organ injuries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13037-022-00339-4.

Could the Injury Severity Score be a new indicator for surgical treatment in patients with traumatic splenic injury?

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine whether a higher Injury Severity Score (ISS) could serve as an indicator of splenectomy in patients with traumatic splenic lacerations.

Methods

A total of 256 cases of splenic laceration were collected from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2018. After the application of exclusion criteria, 105 were eligible for this study. Charts were reviewed for demographic characteristics, initial vital signs upon presentation to the emergency room, Glasgow Coma Scale, computed tomography findings, ISS, and treatment strategies. The cases were then divided into nonsplenectomy and splenectomy groups for analysis.

Results

When analyzed with the chi-square test and t-test, splenectomy was associated with a systolic blood pressure lower than 90 mmHg, a Glasgow Coma Scale score lower than 13, active bleeding found on computed tomography, a splenic laceration grade greater than or equal to 4, and an ISS greater than 15 at presentation. However, in multivariate logistic regression analysis, only active bleeding on computed tomography showed a statistically significant relationship (P=0.014).

Conclusions

Although ISS failed to show a statistically significant independent relationship with splenectomy, it may still play a supplementary role in traumatic splenic injury management.

Liver Trauma: Until When We Have to Delay Surgery? A Review

Liver involvement after abdominal blunt trauma must be expected, and in up to 30% of cases, spleen, kidney, and pancreas injuries may coexist. Whenever hemodynamics conditions do not contraindicate the overcoming of the ancient dogma according to which exploratory laparotomy should be performed after every major abdominal trauma, a CT scan has to clarify the liver lesions so as to determine the optimal management strategy. Except for complete vascular avulsion, no liver trauma grade precludes nonoperative management. Every attempt to treat the injured liver by avoiding a strong surgical approach may be considered. Each time, a nonoperative management (NOM) consisting of a basic “wait and see” attitude combined with systemic support and blood replacement are inadequate. Embolization should be considered to stop the bleeding. Percutaneous drainage of collections, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with papilla sphincterotomy or stent placement and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) may avoid, or at least delay, surgical reconstruction or resection until systemic and hepatic inflammatory remodeling are resolved. The pathophysiological principle sustaining these leanings is based on the opportunity to limit the further release of cell debris fragments acting as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and the following stress response associated with the consequent immune suppression after trauma. The main goal will be a faster recovery combined with limited cell death of the liver through the ischemic events that may directly follow the trauma, exacerbated by hemostatic procedures and surgery, in order to reduce the gross distortion of a regenerated liver.

Liver trauma: WSES 2020 guidelines

Liver injuries represent one of the most frequent life-threatening injuries in trauma patients. In determining the optimal management strategy, the anatomic injury, the hemodynamic status, and the associated injuries should be taken into consideration. Liver trauma approach may require non-operative or operative management with the intent to restore the homeostasis and the normal physiology. The management of liver trauma should be multidisciplinary including trauma surgeons, interventional radiologists, and emergency and ICU physicians. The aim of this paper is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) liver trauma management guidelines.

Cross-sectional imaging of the torso reveals occult injuries in asymptomatic blunt trauma patients

Background

High morbidity and mortality rates of trauma injuries make early detection and correct diagnosis crucial for increasing patient's survival and quality of life after an injury. Improvements in technology have facilitated the rapid detection of injuries, especially with the use of computed tomography (CT). However, the increased use of CT imaging is not universally advocated for. Some advocate for the use of selective CT imaging, especially in cases where the severity of the injury is low. The purpose of this study is to review the CT indications, findings, and complications in patients with low Injury Severity Scores (ISS) to determine the utility of torso CT in this patient cohort.

Methods

A retrospective review of non-intubated, adult blunt trauma patients with an initial GCS of 14 or 15 evaluated in an ACS verified level 1 trauma center from July 2012 to June 2015 was performed. Data was obtained from the hospital's trauma registry and chart review, with the following data included: age, sex, injury type, ISS, physical exam findings, all injuries recorded, injuries detected by torso CT, missed injuries, and complications. The statistical tests conducted in the analysis of the collected data were chi-squared, Fischer exact test, and ANOVA analysis.

Results

There were 2306 patients included in this study, with a mean ISS of 8. For patients with a normal chest exam that had a chest CT, 15% were found to have an occult chest injury. In patients with a negative chest exam and negative chest X-ray, 35% had occult injuries detected on chest CT. For patients with a negative abdominal exam and CT abdomen and pelvis, 16% were found to have an occult injury on CT. Lastly, 25% of patients with normal chest, abdomen, and pelvis exams with chest, abdomen, and pelvis CT scans demonstrated occult injuries. Asymptomatic patients with a negative CT had a length of stay 1 day less than patients without a corresponding CT. No incidents of contrast-induced complications were recorded.

Conclusions

A negative physical exam combined with a normal chest X-ray does not rule out the presence of occult injuries and the need for torso imaging. In blunt trauma patients with normal sensorium, physical exam and chest X-ray, the practice of obtaining cross-sectional imaging appears beneficial by increasing the accuracy of total injury burden and decreasing the length of stay.

Torso injuries after fall from standing-empiric abdominal or thoracic CT imaging is not indicated

PURPOSE

Falls from standing (FFS) have become the most common mechanism of injury at many trauma centers. Liberal imaging of low energy trauma has questionable value. We hypothesize that torso trauma intervention is rare in the FFS population, and physical examination sufficiently screens for torso injuries needing intervention.

METHODS

We queried our ACS-verified Level 1 trauma center registry for falls from standing from 1/1/14 to 12/31/16. Exclusion criteria were: falls from height, falls associated with penetrating trauma, lack of an abdominal or chest CT, a Glasgow Coma Scale Score (GCS) less than 15, and surgical intervention at another facility prior to arrival at our center. Demographics, historical details, hemodynamics, injuries, injury severity, procedures, initial vital signs, and outcome were recorded.

RESULTS

1,654 patients had a FFS during our study period. 728 had an abdominal or chest CT and a GCS of 15 and comprised the evaluable population. Mean age was 56.5 years. 55.8% were female. The mortality rate was 8%. There were 179 chest injuries in 121 patients, and 54 abdominal injuries in 43 patients. 379 patients had a GCS of 15 and underwent thoracic CT, yet only 11 (3%) underwent intervention. The negative predictive value for physical exam was 100% for chest intervention. 349 patients had a GCS of 15 and abdominal CT, yet only 13 (3.7%) underwent procedural intervention. Abdominal physical exam had a negative predictive value of 99.7% for intervention, but when combined with vital signs, the value was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Torso injuries in FFS are rare. Of our study population, 13 abdominal injuries underwent intervention, and 11 chest injuries underwent intervention. Screening patients by physical examination and vital signs is sufficient and safely allows for the use of selective abdominal and chest CT.

Professional practice assessment: establishment of an institutional procedure to treat blunt abdominal trauma in emergency pediatric department

OBJECTIVE

The clinical process for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal lesion due to blunt abdominal trauma in children is not consistent. The goal of the present study was to assess the efficiency of our institutional procedure to manage hemodynamically stable pediatric patients with benign abdominal trauma and to select patients who need a radiological examination in an emergency pediatric department.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study from June 2008 to June 2010 in a pediatric emergency department. Pediatric patients with benign abdominal trauma and with stable hemodynamic parameters were included in the study. We conducted first clinical examination and clinical laboratory assessment for blood count, platelet count, hematocrit, serum glutamo-oxalacétique transaminase (SGOT), serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGPT), lipase and urine. A second clinical examination was performed 2 h later. Patients with biological abnormalities and/or with persistent pain underwent a computerized tomography (CT) of the abdomen. Our main criterion for judging was the presence of intra-abdominal lesion as revealed by the scan, which was considered as the gold standard. At the second clinical examination, patients without pain and with normal results for clinical laboratory assessment were sent home. A telephone call was made to the children 48 h after the visit to the hospital emergency department. The secondary criterion for judging was the absence of complication in children who did not undergo the scan.

RESULTS

A total of 111 children were included. Seventy-five children underwent the complete procedure. Thirty-four scans were performed. The scan revealed that 22 patients had an intra-abdominal lesion. Multivariate analysis indicated that SGOT higher than 34 IU/L and the persistence of pain for more than 2 h from the initial evaluation of trauma favored the development of intra-abdominal lesion. On the basis of these two criteria, we developed a predictive diagnostic score for post-traumatic intra-abdominal injuries with a high negative predictive value. For children who were sent home without a radiological examination, no complications were observed at 48 h after the visit to the emergency department.

CONCLUSION

The present protocol is a good approach to identify children at risk for intra-abdominal lesion who need a radiological examination and those who do not require any complementary examinations. The predictive diagnostic score could help young hospital doctors to assess blunt abdominal trauma.

Torso computed tomography in blunt trauma patients with normal vital signs can be avoided using non-invasive tests and close clinical evaluation

PURPOSE

To determine whether torso CT can be avoided in patients who experience high-energy blunt trauma but have normal vital signs.

METHODS

High-energy blunt trauma patients with normal vital signs were retrieved retrospectively from our registry. We reviewed 1317 patients (1027 men and 290 women) and 761 (57.8%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All patients were initially evaluated at the emergency room (ER), with a set of tests, part of a specific protocol. Patients with at least one altered exam at initial examination or after six-hour observation received a torso CECT. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), and likelihood ratio (LH) of the protocol were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 761 patients, 354 (46.5%) received torso CECT because of the positive ER test, with 330 being true positive and 24 being false positive. The remaining 407 patients were negative at ER tests and did not receive torso CECT, showing a significantly (P < 0.001) lower Injury Severity Score (ISS). The positive and negative LH of the protocol to detect torso injuries were respectively 16.5 and 0.01 (overall accuracy of 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Torso CT can be avoided without adverse clinical outcomes in patients who experience high-energy blunt trauma, are hemodynamically stable, and have normal initial laboratory and imaging tests.

Are serial hematocrit measurements sensitive enough to predict intra-abdominal injuries in blunt abdominal trama?

Objective

Routine serial hematocrit measurements are a component of the trauma evaluation for patients without serious injury identified on initial evaluation. We sought to determine whether serial hematocrit testing was useful in predicting the probable injuries in blunt abdominal trauma.

Materials and method

We performed a prospective study of trauma patients admitted in our observation unit over a 12-month period. Patients routinely underwent serial hematocrit testing in 6-hour intervals (two hematocrit levels). We compared trauma patients with a hematocrit drop of 5 and 10 points or more to those without a significant hematocrit drop.

Results

Five hundred forty-two isolated blunt abdominal trauma patients were admitted to observation unit, and 468 patients (86.35%) had serial hematocrit during their 6-hour stay. Of these patients, 36.11% had a hematocrit drop of 5 or more and 12.61% a drop of 10 or more. Of patients with the hematocrit drop >10, 50.8% have had diagnostic manifestations of intra-abdominal injury in both ultrasonographic and computed tomography scanning (P<0.001). There was no significant correlation between hematocrit drop >5 and positive imaging.

Conclusion

Although serial hematocrit testing may be useful in specific situations, routine use of serial hematocrit testing in trauma patients at a level I trauma center’s observation unit did not significantly aid in the prediction of occult injuries.

[Acute abdominal trauma]

BACKGROUND

In patients with multiple trauma, abdominal involvement is a particularly relevant injury pattern. Depending on the intensity and manner of injury, heterogeneous but often typical organ manifestations result. Knowledge of these injury patterns is essential for targeted diagnostics and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This review provides a presentation of typical forms of abdominal injury with appropriate radiological techniques and where applicable treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Experiences and case examples from a supraregional trauma center are presented and discussed with the results of a Medline literature search and relevant parts of the german S3 guidelines on polytrauma.

RESULTS

Traumatic abdominal injuries are subdivided into blunt and penetrating injuries. Among these groups, blunt trauma with splenic injury being most frequent followed by liver and kidney involvement. In penetrating abdominal injuries hollow visceral organs are most frequently affected. For diagnosis, ultrasound and with escalating injury severity, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) are the most important methods. For years there has been an ongoing trend towards conservative management and interventional hemorrhage control. This is driven by improvements in imaging that enable a more precise classification and indications for subsequent treatment.

CONCLUSION

Progress in radiology has led to an increasingly more important role for radiology in the management of traumatic abdominal injury. Therefore, it is crucial for the radiologist to gain interdisciplinary knowledge of the relevant trauma mechanisms and injury patterns of the severely injured patient in order to provide a treatment process that provides the optimal outcome.

Occult bowel injury after blunt abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Following blunt abdominal trauma, bowel injuries are often missed on admission computed tomography (CT) scan.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective analysis of 176 adults with moderate-critical blunt abdominal trauma and admission CT scan who underwent operative exploration. Patients with a bowel injury missed on CT (n = 36, 20%) were compared to all other patients (n = 140, 80%).

RESULTS

The missed injury group had greater incidence free fluid without solid organ injury on CT scan (44% vs. 25%, p = 0.038) and visceral adhesions (28% vs. 6%, p = 0.001). Independent predictors of missed bowel injury included prior abdominal inflammation (OR 3.74, 95% CI 1.37-10.18), CT evidence of free fluid in the absence of solid organ injury (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.03-5.19) and intraoperative identification of visceral adhesions (OR 4.46, 95% CI 1.52-13.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with visceral adhesive disease and indirect evidence of bowel injury on CT scan were more likely to have occult bowel injury.

The Utility of Additional Imaging in Trauma Consults with Mild to Moderate Injury

Limiting CT imaging in the ED has gained interest recently. After initial trauma workup for consultations in the ED, additional CT imaging is frequently ordered. We assessed the benefits of this additional imaging. Our hypothesis was that additional imaging in lower acuity trauma consults results in the diagnosis of new significant injuries with a change in treatment plan and increased Injury Severity Score (ISS). The registry at our Level I trauma center was queried from November 2015 to November 2016 for trauma consults initially evaluated by ED physicians. Patients with mild to moderate injuries were included. Injury findings before and after additional imaging were determined by chart review and pre- and postimaging ISS were calculated. Blinded trauma surgeons assessed the findings for clinical significance and changes in treatment. Four hundred and twenty-one patients were evaluated, 41 were excluded. One hundred and forty patients (37%) underwent additional CT imaging. Forty-seven patients (34%) had additional injuries found, with 16 (12%) increasing their ISS (mean 0.54, SD 1.66). Ninety-three per cent of cases resulted in at least one physician finding the new injuries clinically significant; however, agreement was low (κ = 0.095). For 70 per cent, at least one physician felt the findings warranted a change in treatment plan (κ = 0.405). Additional imaging in ED trauma consults resulted in the identification of new injuries in 1/3 of our patient sample. This suggests that current efforts to limit the use of CT imaging in trauma patients may result in significant injuries going undiscovered and undertreated. Further research is needed to determine the risk of attempts to limit imaging.

Role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the diagnosis and management of traumatic splenic injuries

Splenic injuries are common emergencies in the setting of abdominal trauma, as the spleen is the second most frequently injured abdominal organ after the liver. The treatment of splenic injuries underwent a severe shift from operative to non-operative due to an increased awareness of the double physiological function, both immunological and hematological, of the spleen. This, in turn, led to an increased application of splenic preservation techniques. The non-operative approach has been strengthened through radiological imaging and interventional radiology. While multidetector computed tomography is mandatory in the evaluation of hemodynamically stable patients after high-energy trauma, one ultrasound (US) can be used as a first-line technique to examine patients in cases of low-energy trauma. Unfortunately, baseline US has low sensitivity in the detection of traumatic injuries. With the introduction of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as a reliable alternative to baseline ultrasound for low-grade abdominal trauma, the sensitivity of the US technique in recognizing traumatic abdominal lesions has strongly increased, reaching levels of accuracy similar to those of the CT. It has also been strongly recommended for use with children, as it allows for the performance of imaging techniques with the lowest dose of radiation possible. In this review, the authors aim to present the typical appearance of traumatic splenic injuries, using enhanced CEUS capability to overcome baseline US limits, and to describe the different techniques applied according to the hemodynamic stability of the patient.

The Impact of Prior Laparotomy and Intra-abdominal Adhesions on Bowel and Mesenteric Injury Following Blunt Abdominal Trauma

BACKGROUND

Early recognition of bowel and mesenteric injury following blunt abdominal trauma remains difficult. We hypothesized that patients with intra-abdominal adhesions from prior laparotomy would be subjected to visceral sheering deceleration forces and increased risk for bowel and mesenteric injury following blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort analysis of 267 consecutive adult trauma patients who underwent operative exploration following moderate-critical (abdominal injury score 2-5) blunt abdominal trauma, comparing patients with prior laparotomy (n = 31) to patients with no prior laparotomy (n = 236). Multivariable regression was performed to identify predictors of bowel or mesenteric injury.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups for injury severity scores or findings on abdominal ultrasound, diagnostic peritoneal aspirate/lavage, pelvic radiography, or preoperative CT scan. The prior laparotomy cohort had greater incidence of full thickness bowel injury (26 vs. 9%, p = 0.010) and mesenteric injury (61 vs. 31%, p = 0.001). The proportion of bowel and mesenteric injuries occurring at the ligament of Treitz or ileocecal region was greater in the no prior laparotomy group (52 vs. 25%, p = 0.003). Prior laparotomy was an independent predictor of bowel or mesenteric injury (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.6-16.8) along with prior abdominal inflammation and free fluid without solid organ injury (model AUC: 0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a prior laparotomy are at increased risk for bowel and mesenteric injury following blunt abdominal trauma. The distribution of bowel and mesenteric injuries among patients with no prior laparotomy favors embryologic transition points tethering free intraperitoneal structures to the retroperitoneum.

Splenic trauma in the twenty-first century: changing trends in management

Over the past three decades, management of blunt splenic trauma has changed radically. Use of improved diagnostic techniques and proper understanding of disease pathology has led to nonoperative management being chosen as the standard of care in patients who are haemodynamically stable. This review was undertaken to assess available literature regarding changing trends of management of blunt splenic trauma, and to identify the existing lacunae in nonoperative management. The PubMed database was searched for studies published between January 1987 and August 2017, using the keywords 'blunt splenic trauma' and 'nonoperative management'. One hundred and fifty-three articles were reviewed, of which 82 free full texts and free abstracts were used in the current review. There is clear evidence in published literature of the greater success of nonoperative over operative management in patients who are haemodynamically stable and the increasing utility of adjunctive therapies like angiography with embolisation. However, the review revealed a lack of universal guidelines for patient selection criteria and diagnostic and grading procedures needed for nonoperative management. Indications for splenic artery embolisation, the current role of splenectomy and spleen-preserving surgeries, together with the place of minimal access surgery in blunt splenic trauma remain grey areas. Moreover, parameters affecting the outcomes of nonoperative management and its failure and management need to be defined. This shows a need for future studies focused on these shortcomings with the ultimate aim being the formulation and implementation of universally accepted guidelines for safe and efficient management of blunt splenic trauma.

Assessment of blunt splenic trauma: Which imaging scoring system is superior?

Background:

Spleen is the most common viscera that may be hurt in blunt abdominal trauma. Operative or nonoperative management of splenic injury is a dilemma. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) is the most common grading system which has been used for the management of blunt splenic injuries. The new recommended grading system assesses other aspects of splenic injury such as contrast extravasation, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, and severity of hemoperitoneum, as well. The aim of this study is to compare and prioritize the cutoff of AAST grading system with the new recommended one.

Materials and Methods:

This is a cross-sectional study on patients with splenic injury caused by abdominal blunt trauma referred to Isfahan University of Medical Sciences affiliated Hospitals, Iran, in 2013–2016. All patients underwent abdominopelvic computed tomography scanning with intravenous (IV) contrast. All images were reported by a single expert radiologist, and splenic injury grading was reported based on AAST and the new recommended system. Then, all patients were followed to see if they needed surgical or nonsurgical management.

Results:

Based on the findings of this study conducted on 68 patients, cutoff point of Grade 2, in AAST system, had 90.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73–0.97) specificity, 51.4% (95% CI: 0.34–0.67) sensitivity, 86.4% (95% CI: 0.64–0.95) positive predictive value (PPV), and 60.9% (95% CI: 0.45–0.74) negative predictive value (NPV) for prediction of surgical management requirement, while it was 90.3% (95% CI: 0.73–0.97) specificity, 45.9% (95% CI: 0.29–0.63) sensitivity, 85% (95% CI: 0.61–0.96) PPV, and 58.3% (95% CI: 0.43–0.72) NPV for the new system (P = 0.816).

Conclusion:

In contrast to the previous studies, the new splenic injury grading method was not superior to AAST. Further studies with larger populations are recommended.

Implementation of clinical effectiveness guidelines for solid organ injury after trauma: 10-year experience at a level 1 pediatric trauma center

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic imaging of pediatric blunt abdominal trauma is evolving in light of increased attention to radiation exposure. We hypothesize that the implementation of imaging guidelines has reduced total CT scans without missing clinically significant injury.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed blunt trauma patients age 0-17 with solid organ injury who underwent CT scan at our academic level 1 pediatric trauma center between 2005 and 2014. Variables including total annual trauma admissions and CT scans, demographics, injury characteristics, and procedures were recorded. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact and rank sum testing were performed. p<0.05 defined significance.

RESULTS

Overall percentage of abdominal CT scans decreased significantly after protocol implementation. There were 498 solid organ injuries in 403 subjects. There was a significant decrease in the median percentage of low grade injuries (1.3% versus 0.6%; p=0.019) but no difference in high grade injuries (1.3% versus 1.1%; p=0.394). No patient had death, readmission or delayed diagnosis of injury requiring intervention.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of imaging guidelines for blunt abdominal trauma decreased the incidence of low grade solid organ injuries at our institution, but did not inhibit diagnosis and safe management of high grade injuries. Selective imaging of trauma patients decreases childhood radiation exposure and does not result in delayed bleeding or death.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective study.

Clinical Predictors of Intra-Abdominal Injury in Severe Blunt Trauma Patient

Introduction

The early recognition of intra-abdominal injury (IAI) in patients with blunt trauma is essential, yet physical examination is often unreliable. Computed tomography (CT) scans are used widely to further evaluate possible IAI but these require time and expense. IAI may be associated with certain objective risk factors or other specific injuries, but this association has not been widely studied. Identification of such risk factors will help to prioritize patients in need for further evaluation of possible IAI.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted of all 622 adult severe blunt trauma patients (Injury Severity Score [ISS] >12) presenting to a level 1 trauma centre in 2004. Various clinical predictors of IAI were analyzed statistically with univariate and multivariate analysis using SAS software.

Results

In multivariate analysis, four significant predictors of IAI were found: positive focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) (OR=48.5, p<0.0001), presence of pelvic fracture (OR=2.4, p=0.0002), chest tube insertion (OR=1.8, p=0.0211), and systolic blood pressure (SBP), where every 10 mmHg decrease indicates a 14% increase in risk (OR=0.986, p=0.001). The absence of all four predictors predicted the absence of IAI with a specificity of 0.776 (95% CI 0.741 to 0.808) and a LR of 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.5).

Conclusion

This study suggests that positive FAST, presence of pelvic fracture, chest tube insertion, and SBP are significant predictors of IAI in adult blunt trauma patients with ISS > 12. The absence of all four predictors is associated with a reduced risk of IAI.

A nomogram predicting the need for abdominal and pelvic computed tomography in blunt trauma patients: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (APCT) has become the preferred means for the initial evaluation of blunt trauma patients. However, computed tomography examination has some disadvantages, such as radiation exposure, the requirement for intravenous iodinated contrast medium, high cost, and time. We aimed to develop a nomogram to predict the need for APCT scanning after the primary survey of blunt trauma patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study at a single-center and reviewed medical records of 972 trauma patients admitted between January 2013 and June 2016. We enrolled 786 blunt trauma patients who had undergone APCT and were 16 years of age or older. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine independent predictors for trauma-related findings on APCT scans. A nomogram was constructed to predict injury on APCT scans based on each predictive factor.

RESULTS

Of 786 patients, 355 (45%) patients had at least 1 injury on APCT scans. Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that independent predictive factors of injuries on APCT scans were as follows: falls (≥3 m high); pain (abdominal, back, flank, or pelvic); positive peritoneal signs; abnormal findings on chest radiographs; abnormal findings on pelvic radiographs; and positive findings on focused assessment with ultrasonography for trauma. The nomogram was developed using these parameters. The area under a receiver operating characteristic curve of the multivariate model for discrimination was 0.865 (95% confidence interval, 0.840-0.892). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed outcomes. The maximal Youden index was 0.59, corresponding to a cutoff value > 59 points, which was considered the optimal cutoff value for the probability that the injury would be detected on APCT scans.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram, based on initial clinical findings in blunt trauma patients, will help clinicians be more selective in their use of APCT evaluations.

Correlating abdominal pain and intra-abdominal injury in patients with blunt abdominal trauma

Background

A thorough history and physical examination in patients with blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) is important to safely exclude clinically significant intra-abdominal injury (IAI). We seek to evaluate a correlation between self-reported abdominal pain, abdominal tenderness on examination and IAI discovered on CT or during exploratory laparotomy.

Methods

This retrospective analysis assessed patients with BAT ≥13 years old who arrived to the emergency department following BAT during the 23-month study period. Upon arrival, the trauma team examined all patients. Only those who underwent an abdominal and pelvic CT scan were included. Patients were excluded if they were unable to communicate or lacked documentation, had obvious evidence of extra-abdominal distracting injuries, had a positive drug or alcohol screen, had a Glasgow Coma Scale ≤13, or had a positive pregnancy screening. The primary objective was to assess the agreement between self-reported abdominal pain and abdominal tenderness on examination and IAI noted on CT or during exploratory laparotomy.

Results

Among the 594 patients included in the final analysis, 73.1% (n=434) had no self-reported abdominal pain, 64.0% (n=384) had no abdominal tenderness on examination, and 22.2% (n=132) had positive CT findings suggestive of IAI. Among the 352 patients who had no self-reported abdominal pain and no abdominal tenderness on examination, a significant number of positive CT scan results (14%, n=50) were still recorded. Furthermore, a small but clinically significant portion of these 50 patients underwent exploratory laparotomy (1.1%, n=4). All four of these patients ultimately underwent a splenectomy and all were completed on hospital day one.

Conclusion

Lack of abdominal pain and tenderness in patients with BAT with non-distracting injuries was associated with a small portion of patients who underwent a splenectomy. Patients with BAT without abdominal pain or tenderness may need a period of observation or CT scan to rule out IAI prior to discharge home.

Level of evidence

Level III, therapeutic/care management.

Is it safe to discharge blunt abdominal trauma patients with normal initial findings?

BACKGROUND

Trauma is the leading health concern among young adults. Blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) is the most common type of blunt traumas. BAT patients may prove normal in the initial clinical assessments, but since the time required for an intra-abdominal injury to be clinically apparent is not predictable, deciding when to safely discharge these patients could be a dilemma. The purpose of this study is to determine whether follow-up of the early discharged or further diagnostic assessment of the later discharged BAT patients with normal initial findings reveals any abnormal findings.

METHODS

Totally, 389 hemodynamically-stable patients suspected of BAT who arrived at the emergency department (ED) of two university hospitals in Tehran from September 2013 to September 2014 were included in this study. Upon arrival at the ED, all subjects underwent abdominal examination and FAST, and were assessed for hematocrit and base deficit levels and presence of hematuria. These assessments were repeated in the patients who were discharged after 6 h, at 6 or 12 h post-arrival. All patients were followed-up after 24 h and one week by phone call.

RESULTS

Out of all study participants, 158 patients (40.6%) had normal findings in all initial assessments. These patients were discharged from the ED after a median of 5 h. After one week of follow-up, none of them had any symptom or complication, or had sought medical attention after being discharged from the study hospitals. Out of these patients, 78 patients (49.4%) were discharged after 6 hours by their physician's decision, and underwent the same diagnostic assessments for the second or third time. None of these assessments revealed any abnormal findings.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of normal abdominal exam, normal FAST, normal hematocrit, normal base deficit, and absence of hematuria rules out intra-abdominal injury in BAT patients. It is safe to discharge patients after they prove normal for these assessments. Longer observation and repeated diagnostic assessment of these patients does not yield any new findings, and seems to be unnecessary.

Evidence-Based Management and Controversies in Blunt Splenic Trauma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The study aims to describe the evidence-based management and controversies in blunt splenic trauma.

RECENT FINDINGS

A shift from operative management to non-operative management (NOM) has occurred over the past decades where NOM has now become the standard of care in haemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury. Splenic artery embolisation (SAE) is generally believed to increase the success rate of NOM. Not all the available evidence is that optimistic about SAE however. A morbidity specifically related to SAE of up to 47% has been reported. Although high-grade splenic injury is a prognostic factor for failure of NOM, an American research group has published a study in which NOM is performed in over half of haemodynamically stable patients with grade IV or V splenic injury without leading to an increased morbidity (in terms of complications) or mortality. Another area of current investigation in the literature is the exact indication for SAE. Although the generally accepted indication is the presence of vascular injury, a topic of current investigation is whether there might be a role for pre-emptive embolisation in patients with high-grade splenic injury. On the other hand, evidence is also emerging that not all blushes require an intervention (small blushes <1 or 1.5 cm do not). Lastly, the available evidence shows that splenic function is preserved after embolisation, and therefore, the routine administration of vaccinations seems not to be necessary. There might be a difference between proximal and distal embolisations; however, with regard to splenic function, in favour of distal embolisation.

SUMMARY

Nowadays, NOM is the standard of care in haemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury. The available evidence (although with a relatively small number of patients) shows that splenic function is preserved after NOM, a major advantage compared to splenectomy. SAE is used as an adjunct to observation in order to increase the success rate of NOM. Operative management should be applied in case of haemodynamic instability or if associated intra-abdominal injuries requiring surgical treatment are present. Patient selection (which patient can be safely treated non-operatively, does every blush needs to be embolised?, which patients might be better off with direct operative intervention given the patient and injury characteristics) is an ongoing subject of further research. Future studies should also focus on long-term outcomes of patients treated with embolisation (e.g. total number of lifetime infectious episodes requiring antibiotic treatment or hospital admission, quality of life).

Assessment of urinary dipstick in patients admitted to an ED for blunt abdominal trauma

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians still face significant challenge in predicting intra-abdominal injuries in patients admitted to an emergency department for blunt abdominal trauma. This study was thus designed to investigate the value of dipstick urinalysis in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study involving patients admitted to the emergency department for abdominal traumas, examined by means of urinary dipstick and abdominal CT scan. The primary endpoint was the correlation between microscopic hematuria detected via dipstick urinalysis (defined by the presence of blood on the dipstick urinalysis but without gross hematuria) and abdominal injury, as evidenced on CT scan.

RESULTS

Of the 100 included patients, 56 experienced microscopic hematuria, 17 gross hematuria, and 44 no hematuria. Patients with abdominal injury were more likely to present with hypovolemic shock (odds ratio [OR]: 8.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.7-26), abdominal wall hematoma (OR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2-7.9), abdominal defense (OR: 5.2; 95% CI: 1.8-14.5), or anemia (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.2-10.3). Moreover, dipstick urinalysis was less likely to predict injury, with just 72.2% sensitivity (95% CI: 54.8-85.8), 53.1% specificity (95% CI: 40.2-65.7), and positive and negative predictive values of 46.4% (95% CI: 33.0-60.3) and 77.3% (95% CI: 62.2-88.5), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Dipstick urinalysis was neither adequately specific nor sensitive for predicting abdominal injury and should thus not be used as a key assessment component in patients suffering from blunt abdominal trauma, with physical exam and vital sign assessment the preferred choice.

WSES classification and guidelines for liver trauma

The severity of liver injuries has been universally classified according to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) grading scale. In determining the optimal treatment strategy, however, the haemodynamic status and associated injuries should be considered. Thus the management of liver trauma is ultimately based on the anatomy of the injury and the physiology of the patient. This paper presents the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) classification of liver trauma and the management Guidelines.

Prediction of blunt traumatic injuries and hospital admission based on history and physical exam

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the ability of experienced trauma surgeons to accurately predict specific blunt injuries, as well as patient disposition from the emergency department (ED), based only on the initial clinical evaluation and prior to any imaging studies. It would be hypothesized that experienced trauma surgeons' initial clinical evaluation is accurate for excluding life-threatening blunt injuries and for appropriate admission triage decisions.

METHODS

Using only their history and physical exam, and prior to any imaging studies, three (3) experienced trauma surgeons, with a combined Level 1 trauma experience of over 50 years, predicted injuries in patients with an initial GCS (Glasgow Coma Score) of 14-15. Additionally, ED disposition (ICU, floor, discharge to home) was also predicted. These predictions were compared to actual patient dispositions and to blunt injuries documented at discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients with 92 blunt injuries were studied. 43/92 (46.7 %) injuries would have been missed by only performing an initial history and physical exam ("Missed injury"). A change in treatment, though often minor, was required in 19/43 (44.2 %) of the missed injuries. Only 1/43 (2.3 %) of these "missed injuries" (blunt aortic injury) required surgery. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for injury prediction were 53.2, 95.9, and 92.3 % respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 53.8 and 95.8 % respectively. Prediction of disposition from the ED was 77.8 % accurate. In 7/34 (20.6 %) patients, missed injuries led to changes in disposition. "Undertriage" occurred in 9/99 (9.1 %) patients (Predicted for floor but admitted to ICU). Additionally, 8/84 (9.5 %) patients predicted for floor admission were sent home from the ED; and 5/13 (38.5 %) patients predicted for ICU admission were actually sent to the floor after complete evaluations, giving an "overtriage" rate of 13/99 (13.1 %) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In a neurologically-intact group of trauma patients, experienced trauma surgeons would have missed 46.7 % of the actual injuries, based only on their history and physical exam. Once accurate diagnoses of injuries were completed, usually with the help of CT scans, admission dispositions changed in 20.6 % of patients. Treatment changes occurred in 44.2 % of the missed injuries, though usually minimal. Broad elimination of early imaging studies in alert, blunt trauma patients cannot be advocated.

Barriers Against Implementing Blunt Abdominal Trauma Guidelines in a Hospital: A Qualitative Study

Introduction

Clinical practice guidelines are structured recommendations that help physicians and patients to make proper decisions when dealing with a specific clinical condition. Because blunt abdominal trauma causes a various range of mild, single-system, and multisystem injuries, early detection will help to reduce mortality and resulting disability. Emergency treatment should be initiated based on CPGs. This study aimed to determine the variables affecting implementing blunt abdominal trauma CPGs in an Iranian hospital.

Methods

This study was conducted as a qualitative and phenomenology study in the Family Hospital in Tehran (Iran) in 2015. The research population included eight experts and key people in the area of blunt abdominal trauma clinical practice guidelines. Sampling was based on purposive and nonrandom methods. A semistructured interview was done for the data collection. A framework method was applied for the data analysis by using Atlas.ti software.

Results

After framework analyzing and various reviewing and deleting and combining the codes from 251 codes obtained, 15 families and five super families were extracted, including technical knowledge barriers, economical barriers, barriers related to deployment and monitoring, political will barriers, and managing barriers.

Conclusion

Structural reform is needed for eliminating the defects available in the healthcare system. As with most of the codes, subconcepts and concepts are classified into the field of human resources; it seems that the education and knowledge will be more important than other resources such as capital and equipment.

Can clinical prediction tools predict the need for computed tomography in blunt abdominal? A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Blunt abdominal trauma is a common reason for admission to the Emergency Department. Early detection of injuries is an important goal but is often not straightforward as physical examination alone is not a good predictor of serious injury. Computed tomography (CT) has become the primary method for assessing the stable trauma patient. It has high sensitivity and specificity but there remains concern regarding the long term consequences of high doses of radiation. Therefore an accurate and reliable method of assessing which patients are at higher risk of injury and hence require a CT would be clinically useful. We perform a systematic review to investigate the use of clinical prediction tools (CPTs) for the identification of abdominal injuries in patients suffering blunt trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and NHS Evidence up to August 2014. English language, prospective and retrospective studies were included if they derived, validated or assessed a CPT, aimed at identifying intra-abdominal injuries or the need for intervention to treat an intra-abdominal after blunt trauma. Methodological quality was assessed using a 14 point scale. Performance was assessed predominantly by sensitivity.

RESULTS

Seven relevant studies were identified. All studies were derivative studies and no CPT was validated in a separate study. There were large differences in the study design, composition of the CPTs, the outcomes analysed and the methodological quality of the included studies. Sensitivities ranged from 86 to 100%. The highest performing CPT had a lower limit of the 95% CI of 95.8% and was of high methodological quality (11 of 14). Had this rule been applied to the population then 25.1% of patients would have avoided a CT scan.

CONCLUSIONS

Seven CPTs were identified of varying designs and methodological quality. All demonstrate relatively high sensitivity with some achieving very high sensitivity whilst still managing to reduce the number of CTs performed by a significant amount. Further studies are required to validate the results obtained by the highest performing CPTs before any firm recommendation can be used regarding their use in routine clinical practice.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in blunt abdominal trauma

Baseline ultrasound is essential in the early assessment of patients with a huge haemoperitoneum undergoing an immediate abdominal surgery; nevertheless, even with a highly experienced operator, it is not sufficient to exclude parenchymal injuries. More recently, a new ultrasound technique using second generation contrast agents, named contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been developed. This technique allows all the vascular phase to be performed in real time, increasing ultrasound capability to detect parenchymal injuries, enhancing some qualitative findings, such as lesion extension, margins and its relationship with capsule and vessels. CEUS has been demonstrated to be almost as sensitive as contrast-enhanced CT in the detection of traumatic injuries in patients with low-energy isolated abdominal trauma, with levels of sensitivity and specificity up to 95%. Several studies demonstrated its ability to detect lesions occurring in the liver, spleen, pancreas and kidneys and also to recognize active bleeding as hyperechoic bands appearing as round or oval spots of variable size. Its role seems to be really relevant in paediatric patients, thus avoiding a routine exposure to ionizing radiation. Nevertheless, CEUS is strongly operator dependent, and it has some limitations, such as the cost of contrast media, lack of panoramicity, the difficulty to explore some deep regions and the poor ability to detect injuries to the urinary tract. On the other hand, it is timesaving, and it has several advantages, such as its portability, the safety of contrast agent, the lack to ionizing radiation exposure and therefore its repeatability, which allows follow-up of those traumas managed conservatively, especially in cases of fertile females and paediatric patients.

Severity and treatment of "occult" intra-abdominal injuries in blunt trauma victims

BACKGROUND

to assess the severity and treatment of "occult" intra-abdominal injuries in blunt trauma victims.

METHOD

Retrospective analysis of charts and trauma register data of adult blunt trauma victims, admitted without abdominal pain or alterations in the abdominal physical examination, but were subsequently diagnosed with intra-abdominal injuries, in a period of 2 years. The severity was stratified according to RTS, AIS, OIS and ISS. The specific treatment for abdominal injuries and the complications related to them were assessed.

RESULTS

Intra-abdominal injuries were diagnosed in 220 (3.8%) out of the 5785 blunt trauma victims and 76 (34.5%) met the inclusion criteria. The RTS and ISS median (lower quartile, upper quartile) were 7.84 (6.05, 7.84) and 25 (16, 34). Sixty seven percent had a GCS≥13 on admission. Injuries were identified in the spleen (34), liver (33), kidneys (9), intestines (4), diaphragm (3), bladder (3) and iliac vessels (1). Abdominal injuries scored AIS≥3 in 67% of patients. Twenty-one patients (28%) underwent laparotomy, 5 of which were nontherapeutic. The surgical procedures performed were splenectomy (8), suturing of the diaphragm (3), intestines (3), bladder (2), kidneys (1), enterectomy/anastomosis (1), ligation of the common iliac vein (1), and revascularization of the common iliac artery (1). Angiography and embolization of liver and/or spleen injuries were performed in 3 cases. Three patients developed abdominal complications, all of which were operatively treated. There were no deaths directly related to the abdominal injuries.

CONCLUSION

Severe "occult" intra-abdominal injuries, requiring specific treatment, may be present in adult blunt trauma patients.

Predictors of "occult" intra-abdominal injuries in blunt trauma patients

OBJECTIVE

to assess predictors of intra-abdominal injuries in blunt trauma patients admitted without abdominal pain or abnormalities on the abdomen physical examination.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of trauma registry data, including adult blunt trauma patients admitted from 2008 to 2010 who sustained no abdominal pain or abnormalities on physical examination of the abdomen at admission and were submitted to computed tomography of the abdomen and/or exploratory laparotomy. Patients were assigned into: Group 1 (with intra-abdominal injuries) or Group 2 (without intra-abdominal injuries). Variables were compared between groups to identify those significantly associated with the presence of intra-abdominal injuries, adopting p<0.05 as significant. Subsequently, the variables with p<0.20 on bivariate analysis were selected to create a logistic regression model using the forward stepwise method.

RESULTS

A total of 268 cases met the inclusion criteria. Patients in Group I were characterized as having significantly (p<0.05) lower mean AIS score for the head segment (1.0 ± 1.4 vs. 1.8 ± 1.9), as well as higher mean AIS thorax score (1.6 ± 1.7 vs. 0.9 ± 1.5) and ISS (25.7 ± 14.5 vs. 17,1 ± 13,1). The rate of abdominal injuries was significantly higher in run-over pedestrians (37.3%) and in motorcyclists (36.0%) (p<0.001). The resultant logistic regression model provided 73.5% accuracy for identifying abdominal injuries. The variables included were: motorcyclist accident as trauma mechanism (p<0.001 - OR 5.51; 95%CI 2.40-12.64), presence of rib fractures (p<0.003 - OR 3.00; 95%CI 1.47-6.14), run-over pedestrian as trauma mechanism (p=0.008 - OR 2.85; 95%CI 1.13-6.22) and abnormal neurological physical exam at admission (p=0.015 - OR 0.44; 95%CI 0.22-0.85).

CONCLUSION

Intra-abdominal injuries were predominantly associated with trauma mechanism and presence of chest injuries.

Comparison of Clinician Suspicion Versus a Clinical Prediction Rule in Identifying Children at Risk for Intra-abdominal Injuries After Blunt Torso Trauma

OBJECTIVES

Emergency department (ED) identification and radiographic evaluation of children with intra-abdominal injuries who need acute intervention can be challenging. To date, it is unclear if a clinical prediction rule is superior to unstructured clinician judgment in identifying these children. The objective of this study was to compare the test characteristics of clinician suspicion with a derived clinical prediction rule to identify children at risk of intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention following blunt torso trauma.

METHODS

This was a planned subanalysis of a prospective, multicenter observational study of children (<18 years old) with blunt torso trauma conducted in 20 EDs in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN). Clinicians documented their suspicion for the presence of intra-abdominal injuries needing acute intervention as <1, 1 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 50, or >50% prior to knowledge of abdominal computed tomography (CT) scanning (if performed). Intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention were defined by a therapeutic laparotomy, angiographic embolization, blood transfusion for abdominal hemorrhage, or intravenous fluid administration for 2 or more days in those with pancreatic or gastrointestinal injuries. Patients were considered to be positive for clinician suspicion if suspicion was documented as ≥1%. Suspicion ≥ 1% was compared to the presence of any variable in the prediction rule for identifying children with intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention.

RESULTS

Clinicians recorded their suspicion in 11,919 (99%) of 12,044 patients enrolled in the parent study. Intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention were diagnosed in 203 (2%) patients. Abdominal CT scans were obtained in the ED in 2,302 of the 2,667 (86%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 85% to 88%) enrolled patients with clinician suspicion ≥1% and in 3,016 of the 9,252 (33%, 95% CI = 32% to 34%) patients with clinician suspicion < 1%. Sensitivity of the prediction rule for intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention (197 of 203; 97.0%, 95% CI = 93.7% to 98.9%) was higher than that of clinician suspicion ≥1% (168 of 203; 82.8%, 95% CI = 76.9% to 87.7%; difference = 14.2%, 95% CI = 8.6% to 20.0%). Specificity of the prediction rule (4,979 of the 11,716; 42.5%, 95% CI = 41.6% to 43.4%), however, was lower than that of clinician suspicion (9,217 of the 11,716, 78.7%, 95% CI = 77.9% to 79.4%; difference = -36.2%, 95% CI = -37.3% to -35.0%). Thirty-five (0.4%, 95% CI = 0.3% to 0.5%) patients with clinician suspicion < 1% had intra-abdominal injuries that underwent acute intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The derived clinical prediction rule had a significantly higher sensitivity, but lower specificity, than clinician suspicion for identifying children with intra-abdominal injuries undergoing acute intervention. The higher specificity of clinician suspicion, however, did not translate into clinical practice, as clinicians frequently obtained abdominal CT scans in patients they considered very low risk. If validated, this prediction rule can assist in clinical decision-making around abdominal CT use in children with blunt torso trauma.

Liver trauma: WSES position paper

The liver is the most injured organ in abdominal trauma. Road traffic crashes and antisocial, violent behavior account for the majority of liver injuries. The present position paper represents the position of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) about the management of liver injuries.

Utilization of a clinical prediction rule for abdominal-pelvic CT scans in patients with blunt abdominal trauma

This study aims to determine if a clinical prediction (CP) rule to identify patients at low risk for intra-abdominal injury (IAI) is being utilized in patients undergoing abdominal computed tomography (CT) following blunt abdominal trauma. A retrospective review of adult patients with blunt abdominal trauma undergoing abdominal CT scans was performed. The CP rule was positive if any of the following were present: systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg; urinalysis >25 red blood cells/high power field; Glasgow Coma Scale score <14; abdominal tenderness; costal margin tenderness; femur fracture; hematocrit <30 %; or pneumothorax or rib fracture on chest X-ray. The CP rule was negative if all variables were negative. Acute intervention was defined as therapeutic laparotomy or angiographic embolization. All variables in the CP rule were obtained in 218/262 (83 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 78, 88 %) patients. Of the 44 patients without complete CP rule assessment, 1 (2.3 %; 95 % CI, 0.1 %, 12.0 %) had an IAI but did not undergo therapeutic intervention. IAI was present in 11 (6.7 %; 95 % CI, 3.4, 11.6 %) of the 165 patients with at least one CP rule positive and 4 (36 %; 95 % CI, 11, 69 %) underwent therapeutic intervention. In the CP rule-negative patients, IAI was identified in 1/53 (1.9 %; 95 % CI, 0, 10.1 %) and no therapeutic intervention was required. An important percentage of patients undergoing abdominal CT are not assessed for or have a negative CP rule. Improved implementation of this CP rule may reduce unnecessary abdominal CT scans in patients presenting with blunt abdominal trauma.

Intra-abdominal injury following blunt trauma becomes clinically apparent within 9 hours

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of blunt abdominal trauma can be challenging and resource intensive. Observation with serial clinical assessments plays a major role in the evaluation of these patients, but the time required for intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of time required for an intra-abdominal injury to become clinically apparent after blunt abdominal trauma via physical examination or commonly followed clinical values.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who sustained blunt trauma resulting in intra-abdominal injury between June 2010 and June 2012 at a Level 1 academic trauma center was performed. Patient demographics, injuries, and the amount of time from emergency department admission to sign or symptom development and subsequent diagnosis were recorded. All diagnoses were made by computed tomography or at the time of surgery. Patient transfers from other hospitals were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 3,574 blunt trauma patients admitted to the hospital, 285 (8%) experienced intra-abdominal injuries. The mean (SD) age was 36 (17) years, the majority were male (194 patients, 68%) and the mean (SD) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 21 (14). The mean (SD) time from admission to diagnosis via computed tomography or surgery was 74 (55) minutes. Eighty patients (28%) required either surgery (78 patients, 17%) or radiographic embolization (2 patients, 0.7%) for their injury. All patients who required intervention demonstrated a sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury within 60 minutes of arrival, although two patients were intervened upon in a delayed fashion. All patients with a blunt intra-abdominal injury manifested a clinical sign or symptom of their intra-abdominal injury, resulting in their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital.

CONCLUSION

All diagnosed intra-abdominal injuries from blunt trauma manifested clinical signs or symptoms that could prompt imaging or intervention, leading to their diagnosis within 8 hours 25 minutes of arrival to the hospital. All patients who required an intervention for their injury manifested a sign or symptom of their injury within 60 minutes of arrival.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV. Epidemiologic study, level III.

Comparing diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound and radiography for bone fracture screening in multiple trauma patients at the ED

INTRODUCTION

Long bone fractures are currently diagnosed using radiography, but radiography has some disadvantages (radiation and being time consuming). The present study compared the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound and radiography in multiple trauma patients at the emergency department (ED).

METHOD

The study assessed 80 injured patients with multiple trauma from February 2011 to July 2012. The patients were older than 18 years and triaged to the cardiopulmonary resuscitation ward of the ED. Bedside ultrasound and radiography were conducted for them. The findings were separately and blindly assessed by 2 radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, the positive and negative predictive value, and κ coefficient were measured to assess the accuracy and validity of ultrasound as compared with radiography.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of ultrasound for diagnosis of limb bone fractures was not high enough and ranged between 55% and 75% depending on the fracture site. The specificity of this diagnostic method had an acceptable range of 62% to 84%. Ultrasound negative prediction value was higher than other indices under study and ranged between 73% and 83%, but its positive prediction value varied between 33.3% and 71%. The κ coefficient for diagnosis of long bone fractures of upper limb (κ = 0.58) and upper limb joints (κ = 0.47) and long bones of lower limb (κ = 0.52) was within the medium range. However, the value for diagnosing fractures of lower limb joints (κ = 0.47) was relatively low.

CONCLUSION

Bedside ultrasound is not a reliable method for diagnosing fractures of upper and lower limb bones compared with radiography.

Blunt hollow viscus and mesenteric injury: still underrecognized

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of more accurate imaging modalities, specifically multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), the diagnosis of non-ischemic (NI-) and ischemic (I-) blunt hollow viscus and mesenteric injury (BHVMI) remains challenging. We hypothesized that BHVMI can be still missed with newer generations of MDCT and that patients with I-BHVMI have a poorer outcome than those with NI-BHVMI.

METHODS

We performed an eight-year retrospective review at a level 1 trauma center. Ischemic-BHVMI was defined as devascularization confirmed at laparotomy. Non-ischemic-BHVMI included perforation, laceration, and hematoma without devascularization. The sensitivity of each generation of MDCT for BHVMI was calculated. Potential predictors and outcomes of I-BHVMI were compared to the NI-BHVMI group.

RESULTS

Of 7,875 blunt trauma patients, 67 patients (0.8 %) were included in the BHVMI group; 13 patients did not have any CT findings suggestive of BHVMI (sensitivity 81 %), and 11 of them underwent surgical intervention without delay (<5 h). Newer generations of MDCT were not associated with higher sensitivity. Patients with I-BHVMI had a significantly higher rate of delayed laparotomy ≥ 12 h (23 % versus 2 %; p = 0.01) and a significantly longer length of hospital stay (median 14 versus 9 days; p = 0.02) than those with NI-BHVMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Even using an advanced imaging technique, the diagnosis of I-BHVMI can be delayed, with significant negative impact on patient outcome.

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.

Pancreatic laceration in a female collegiate soccer athlete: a case report

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the diagnosis of pancreatic trauma in an athletic population and to raise awareness among health care providers of the possibility of this life- and organ-threatening injury.

BACKGROUND

An 18-year-old, previously healthy female collegiate soccer athlete sustained a direct blow from an opponent's knee between the left and right upper abdominal quadrants while attempting to head the ball. She initially presented with only minimal nausea and discomfort, but this progressed to abdominal pain, tenderness, spasm, and vomiting. She was referred to the emergency department, where she was diagnosed with a pancreatic laceration.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

Duodenal, hepatic, or splenic contusion or laceration; hemorrhagic ovarian cyst.

TREATMENT

The patient underwent a distal pancreatectomy and total splenectomy.

UNIQUENESS

Pancreatic injuries, particularly those severe enough to warrant surgical intervention, are extremely rare in athletes.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognition of a pancreatic injury can be very challenging outside the hospital setting. This is problematic, because a delay in diagnosis is a significant source of preventable morbidity and mortality after this rare injury. Thus, early identification depends on a high index of suspicion, a thorough examination, and close observation. It is imperative that athletic trainers and other health care professionals be able to identify this condition so that referral and management can occur without delay.