CT or not CT--that is the question. Whether 'tis better to evaluate clinically and x ray than to undertake a CT head scan!

Validation of the Canadian CT Head Rule and the New Orleans Criteria for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major public health problem worldwide. Although computed tomography (CT) scans are often used for TBI workup, clinicians in low-income countries are limited by fewer radiographic resources. The Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) and the New Orleans Criteria (NOC) are widely used screening tools to rule out clinically important brain injury without CT imaging. Although these tools are well validated in studies from upper- and middle-income countries, it is important to study these tools in low-income countries. This study sought to validate the CCHR and NOC in a tertiary teaching hospital population in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients older than 13 years presenting from December 2018 to July 2021 with a head injury and a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13-15. Retrospective chart review collected demographic, clinical, radiographic, and hospital course variables. Proportion tables were constructed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of these tools.

RESULTS

A total of 193 patients were included. Both tools showed 100% sensitivity for identifying patients requiring neurosurgical intervention and abnormal CT scans. The specificity for the CCHR was 41.5% and 26.5% for the NOC. Male gender, falling accidents, and headaches had the strongest association with abnormal CT findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The NOC and the CCHR are highly sensitive screening tools that can help rule out clinically important brain injury in mild TBI patients without a head CT in an urban Ethiopian population. Their implementation in this low-resource setting may help spare a significant number of CT scans.

Documentation of paediatric head injuries in a mixed metropolitan emergency department

OBJECTIVE

Head injuries are a common presentation of children to Australian EDs. Healthcare documentation is an important tool for enhancing patient care. In our study, we aimed to assess the adequacy of paediatric head injury documentation in a mixed ED.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of presentations to a mixed ED between 2017 and 2018. Children aged <16 years old with a primary diagnosis of head injury were included. Documentation items based on local head injury guidelines were assessed in both medical and nursing documentation. We compared cases aged <1 and ≥1 year.

RESULTS

There were 427 presentations that met the case definition. Medical documentation was present in 422 cases and nursing documentation in 310 cases. In combined medical and nursing documentation, items poorly documented include blood pressure (BP; 21.3%) and secondary survey (16.9%). In solely medical documentation, least commonly documented items are high-risk bony injuries (22.5%), high-risk soft tissue injuries (22.3%), seizure (22.0%) and non-accidental injury (3.6%). Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was poorly documented in cases aged <1 year (10.9%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The largest gaps in the documentation of paediatric head injuries were BP and paediatric GCS in infants. Future audits and educational strategies should focus on targeting clinically relevant items that are predictive of serious outcomes.

Incidence of combined cranial and cervical spine injuries in patients with blunt minor trauma: are combined CT examinations of the head and cervical spine justified?

Background The use of computed tomography (CT) scans of the head and cervical spine has markedly increased in patients with blunt minor trauma. The actual likelihood of a combined injury of head and cervical spine following a minor trauma is estimated to be low. Purpose To determine the incidence of such combined injuries in patients with a blunt minor trauma in order to estimate the need to derive improved diagnostic guidelines. Material and Methods A total of 1854 patients were retrospectively analyzed. All cases presented to the emergency department and in all patients combined CT scans of head and cervical spine were conducted. For the following analysis, only 1342 cases with assured blunt minor trauma were included. Data acquisition covered age, sex, and presence of a head injury as well as presence of a cervical spine injury or both. Results Of the 1342 cases, 46.9% were men. The mean age was 65.6 years. CT scans detected a head injury in 116 patients; of these, 70 cases showed an intracranial hemorrhage, 11 cases a skull fracture, and 35 cases an intracranial hemorrhage as well as a skull fracture. An injury of the cervical spine could be detected in 40 patients. A combined injury of the head and cervical spine could be found in one patient. Conclusion The paradigm of the coincidence of cranial and cervical spine injuries should be revised in patients with blunt minor trauma. Valid imaging decision algorithms are strongly needed to clinically detect high-risk patients in order to save limited resources.

Derivation and validation of a clinical decision rule to identify young children with skull fracture following isolated head trauma

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus regarding radiologic evaluation of head trauma in young children without traumatic brain injury. We conducted a study to develop and validate a clinical decision rule to identify skull fracture in young children with head trauma and no immediate need for head tomography.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study in 3 tertiary care emergency departments in the province of Quebec. Participants were children less than 2 years old who had a head trauma and were not at high risk of clinically important traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score < 15, altered level of consciousness or palpable skull fracture). The primary outcome was skull fracture. For each participant, the treating physician completed a standardized report form after physical examination and before radiologic evaluation. The decision to order skull radiography was at the physician's discretion. The clinical decision rule was derived using recursive partitioning.

RESULTS

A total of 811 patients (49 with skull fracture) were recruited during the derivation phase. The 2 predictors identified through recursive partitioning were parietal or occipital swelling or hematoma and age less than 2 months. The rule had a sensitivity of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83%-99%) and a specificity of 86% (95% CI 84%-89%) in the derivation phase. During the validation phase, 856 participants (44 with skull fracture) were recruited. The rule had a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 87% during this phase.

INTERPRETATION

The clinical decision rule developed in this study identified about 90% of skull fractures among young children with mild head trauma who had no immediate indication for head tomography. Use of the rule would have reduced the number of radiologic evaluations by about 60%.

ICRP publication 121: radiological protection in paediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology

Paediatric patients have a higher average risk of developing cancer compared with adults receiving the same dose. The longer life expectancy in children allows more time for any harmful effects of radiation to manifest, and developing organs and tissues are more sensitive to the effects of radiation. This publication aims to provide guiding principles of radiological protection for referring clinicians and clinical staff performing diagnostic imaging and interventional procedures for paediatric patients. It begins with a brief description of the basic concepts of radiological protection, followed by the general aspects of radiological protection, including principles of justification and optimisation. Guidelines and suggestions for radiological protection in specific modalities - radiography and fluoroscopy, interventional radiology, and computed tomography - are subsequently covered in depth. The report concludes with a summary and recommendations. The importance of rigorous justification of radiological procedures is emphasised for every procedure involving ionising radiation, and the use of imaging modalities that are non-ionising should always be considered. The basic aim of optimisation of radiological protection is to adjust imaging parameters and institute protective measures such that the required image is obtained with the lowest possible dose of radiation, and that net benefit is maximised to maintain sufficient quality for diagnostic interpretation. Special consideration should be given to the availability of dose reduction measures when purchasing new imaging equipment for paediatric use. One of the unique aspects of paediatric imaging is with regards to the wide range in patient size (and weight), therefore requiring special attention to optimisation and modification of equipment, technique, and imaging parameters. Examples of good radiographic and fluoroscopic technique include attention to patient positioning, field size and adequate collimation, use of protective shielding, optimisation of exposure factors, use of pulsed fluoroscopy, limiting fluoroscopy time, etc. Major paediatric interventional procedures should be performed by experienced paediatric interventional operators, and a second, specific level of training in radiological protection is desirable (in some countries, this is mandatory). For computed tomography, dose reduction should be optimised by the adjustment of scan parameters (such as mA, kVp, and pitch) according to patient weight or age, region scanned, and study indication (e.g. images with greater noise should be accepted if they are of sufficient diagnostic quality). Other strategies include restricting multiphase examination protocols, avoiding overlapping of scan regions, and only scanning the area in question. Up-to-date dose reduction technology such as tube current modulation, organ-based dose modulation, auto kV technology, and iterative reconstruction should be utilised when appropriate. It is anticipated that this publication will assist institutions in encouraging the standardisation of procedures, and that it may help increase awareness and ultimately improve practices for the benefit of patients.

Radiological protection in paediatric computed tomography

It is well known that paediatric patients are generally at greater risk for the development of cancer per unit of radiation dose compared with adults, due both to the longer life expectancy for any harmful effects of radiation to manifest, and the fact that developing organs and tissues are more sensitive to the effects of radiation. Multiple computed tomography (CT) examinations may cumulatively involve absorbed doses to organs and tissues that can sometimes approach or exceed the levels known from epidemiological studies to significantly increase the probability of cancer development. Radiation protection strategies include rigorous justification of CT examinations and the use of imaging techniques that are non-ionising, followed by optimisation of radiation dose exposure (according to the 'as low as reasonably achievable' principle). Special consideration should be given to the availability of dose reduction technology when acquiring CT scanners. Dose reduction should be optimised by adjustment of scan parameters (such as mAs, kVp, and pitch) according to patient weight or age, region scanned, and study indication (e.g. images with greater noise should be accepted if they are of sufficient diagnostic quality). Other strategies include restricting multiphase examination protocols, avoiding overlapping of scan regions, and only scanning the area in question. Newer technologies such as tube current modulation, organ-based dose modulation, and iterative reconstruction should be used when appropriate. Attention should also be paid to optimising study quality (e.g. by image post-processing to facilitate radiological diagnoses and interpretation). Finally, improving awareness through education and advocacy, and further research in paediatric radiological protection are important to help reduce patient dose.

Radiation exposure has increased in trauma patients over time

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography (CT) scans have become imaging modalities of choice in trauma centers. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the trend of radiation exposure in acute trauma patients. Our hypothesis was that radiation dosage and charges would increase over time without change in patient acuity or outcome.

METHODS

Five hundred consecutive trauma patients were retrospectively reviewed for the years 2002, 2005, and 2008. Total number of CT scans, plain radiographs, and total radiation dosage (milliSieverts [mSV]) were determined. Charges were calculated. Injury severity scores and mortality were determined.

RESULTS

The mean number of CT scans for category 1 patients in 2002, 2005, and 2008 was 1.5, 3.1, and 4.6, respectively (p = 0.01). This trend was similar in category 2 patients: 2.0, 3.5, 5.1, respectively (p < 0.01). Significant decreases in plain radiography were noted concurrently. This contributed to increased total radiation exposure to categories 1 and 2 patients over 2002, 2005, and 2008: 12.0 mSV, 23.6 mSV, and 33.6 mSV (p = 0.02); and 17.5 mSV, 24.1 mSV, and 37.5 mSV (p < 0.001), respectively. Charges for diagnostic imaging per patient also increased for categories 1 and 2 patients over 2002, 2005, and 2008: $2,933, $4,656, and $6,677; and $4,105, $5,344, and $7,365, respectively (all p < 0.01). Over the course of a year for 4,800 trauma patients treated at our hospital, this is expected to accrue additional charges of $13 million.

CONCLUSION

The number of CT scans per trauma patient has more than doubled over 6 years, generating more radiation exposure and charges per patient, despite no change in mortality or injury severity. Judicious use of advanced imaging may control risks and costs without compromising care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective.

Elevated levels of serum glial fibrillary acidic protein breakdown products in mild and moderate traumatic brain injury are associated with intracranial lesions and neurosurgical intervention

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study examines whether serum levels of glial fibrillary acidic protein breakdown products (GFAP-BDP) are elevated in patients with mild and moderate traumatic brain injury compared with controls and whether they are associated with traumatic intracranial lesions on computed tomography (CT) scan (positive CT result) and with having a neurosurgical intervention.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study enrolled adult patients presenting to 3 Level I trauma centers after blunt head trauma with loss of consciousness, amnesia, or disorientation and a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 9 to 15. Control groups included normal uninjured controls and trauma controls presenting to the emergency department with orthopedic injuries or a motor vehicle crash without traumatic brain injury. Blood samples were obtained in all patients within 4 hours of injury and measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for GFAP-BDP (nanograms/milliliter).

RESULTS

Of the 307 patients enrolled, 108 were patients with traumatic brain injury (97 with GCS score 13 to 15 and 11 with GCS score 9 to 12) and 199 were controls (176 normal controls and 16 motor vehicle crash controls and 7 orthopedic controls). Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated that early GFAP-BDP levels were able to distinguish patients with traumatic brain injury from uninjured controls with an area under the curve of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86 to 0.94) and differentiated traumatic brain injury with a GCS score of 15 with an area under the curve of 0.88 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.93). Thirty-two patients with traumatic brain injury (30%) had lesions on CT. The area under these curves for discriminating patients with CT lesions versus those without CT lesions was 0.79 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.89). Moreover, the receiver operating characteristic curve for distinguishing neurosurgical intervention from no neurosurgical intervention yielded an area under the curve of 0.87 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.96).

CONCLUSION

GFAP-BDP is detectable in serum within an hour of injury and is associated with measures of injury severity, including the GCS score, CT lesions, and neurosurgical intervention. Further study is required to validate these findings before clinical application.

Children's exposure to diagnostic medical radiation and cancer risk: epidemiologic and dosimetric considerations

While the etiology of most childhood cancers is largely unknown, epidemiologic studies have consistently found an association between exposure to medical radiation during pregnancy and risk of childhood cancer in offspring. The relation between early life diagnostic radiation exposure and occurrence of pediatric cancer risks is less clear. This review summarizes current and historical estimated doses for common diagnostic radiologic procedures as well as the epidemiologic literature on the role of maternal prenatal, children's postnatal and parental preconception diagnostic radiologic procedures on subsequent risk of childhood malignancies. Risk estimates are presented according to factors such as the year of birth of the child, trimester and medical indication for the procedure, and the number of films taken. The paper also discusses limitations of the methods employed in epidemiologic studies to assess pediatric cancer risks, the effects on clinical practice of the results reported from the epidemiologic studies, and clinical and public health policy implications of the findings. Gaps in understanding and additional research needs are identified. Important research priorities include nationwide surveys to estimate fetal and childhood radiation doses from common diagnostic procedures, and epidemiologic studies to quantify pediatric and lifetime cancer risks from prenatal and early childhood exposures to diagnostic radiography, CT, and fluoroscopically guided procedures.

A critical comparison of clinical decision instruments for computed tomographic scanning in mild closed traumatic brain injury in adolescents and adults

STUDY OBJECTIVE

A number of clinical decision aids have been introduced to limit unnecessary computed tomographic scans in patients with mild traumatic brain injury. These aids differ in the risk factors they use to recommend a scan. We compare the instruments according to their sensitivity and specificity and recommend ones based on incremental benefit of correctly classifying patients as having surgical, nonsurgical, or no intracranial lesions.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of prospectively collected database from 7,955 patients aged 10 years or older with mild traumatic brain injury to compare sensitivity and specificity of 6 common clinical decision strategies: the Canadian CT Head Rule, the Neurotraumatology Committee of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies, the New Orleans, the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study II (NEXUS-II), the National Institute of Clinical Excellence guideline, and the Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee guideline. Excluded from the database were patients for whom the history of trauma was unclear, the initial Glasgow Coma Scale score was less than 14, the injury was penetrating, vital signs were unstable, or who refused diagnostic tests. Patients revisiting the emergency department within 7 days were counted only once.

RESULTS

The percentage of scans that would have been required by applying each of the 6 aids were Canadian CT head rule (high risk only) 53%, Canadian (medium & high risk) 56%, the Neurotraumatology Committee of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies 56%, New Orleans 69%, NEXUS-II 56%, National Institute of Clinical Excellence 71%, and the Scandinavian 50%. The 6 decision aids' sensitivities for surgical hematomas could not be distinguished statistically (P>.05). Sensitivity was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96% to 100%) for NEXUS-II, 98.1% (95% CI 93% to 100%) for National Institute of Clinical Excellence, and 99.1% (95% CI 94% to 100%) for the other 4 clinical decision instruments. Sensitivity for any intracranial lesion ranged from 95.7% (95% CI 93% to 97%) (Scandinavian) to 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) (National Institute of Clinical Excellence). In contrast, specificities varied between 30.9% (95% CI 30% to 32%) (National Institute of Clinical Excellence) and 52.9% (95% CI 52% to 54) (Scandinavian).

CONCLUSION

NEXUS-II and the Scandinavian clinical decision aids displayed the best combination of sensitivity and specificity in this patient population. However, we cannot demonstrate that the higher sensitivity of NEXUS-II for surgical hematomas is statistically significant. Therefore, choosing which of the 2 clinical decision instruments to use must be based on decisionmakers' attitudes toward risk.

Controversies in the evaluation and management of minor blunt head trauma in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We present data from recently conducted research regarding controversial aspects of the evaluation and management of children with minor blunt head trauma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinicians frequently but at times indiscriminately perform computed tomography scans for children with minor blunt head trauma resulting in potentially harmful radiation exposure. Recent guidelines recognize the limited but increasing data available to make strong recommendations regarding appropriate neuroimaging decisions. Investigators have derived and validated clinical prediction models to accurately identify patients with substantial traumatic brain injury, though no clear definitive rule exists. Children younger than 2 years appear to have a higher risk of intracranial injury following minor head trauma. These patients can be difficult to assess, with the evidence suggesting the need for a more conservative approach to diagnostic imaging. We present current and accepted definitions of concussion along with risk factors and treatment for postconcussion syndrome. Current return-to-play guidelines suggest that athletes who have sustained concussion should not resume play until symptoms have resolved because of the possibility, though rare, of second impact syndrome.

SUMMARY

Research in the management of children with minor head trauma is actively evolving. We present a review of recent developments that can influence current clinical practice.