Screening Ultrasound in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Ultrasonographic inferior vena cava diameter response to trauma resuscitation after 1 hour predicts 24-hour fluid requirement

BACKGROUND

Identification of occult hypovolemia in trauma patients is difficult. We hypothesized that in acute trauma patients, the response of ultrasound-measured minimum inferior vena cava diameter (IVCDMIN), IVC Collapsibility Index (IVCCI), minimum internal jugular diameter (IJVDMIN) or IJV Collapsibility Index (IJVCI) after up to 1 hour of fluid resuscitation would predict 24-hour resuscitation intravenous fluid requirements (24FR).

METHODS

An NTI-funded, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multi-Institutional Trials Committee prospective, cohort trial was conducted at four Level I Trauma Centers. Major trauma patients were screened for an IVCD of 12 mm or less or IVCCI of 50% or less on initial focused assessment sonographic evaluations for trauma. A second IVCD was obtained 40 minutes to 60 minutes later, after standard-of-care fluid resuscitation. Patients whose second measured IVCD was less than 10 mm were deemed nonrepleted (NONREPLETED), those 10 mm or greater were repleted (REPLETED). Prehospital and initial resuscitation fluids and 24FR were recorded. Demographics, Injury Severity Score, arterial blood gasses, length of stay, interventions, and complications were recorded. Means were compared by ANOVA and categorical variables were compared via χ. Receiver operating characteristic curves analysis was used to compare the measures as 24FR predictors.

RESULTS

There were 4,798 patients screened, 196 were identified with admission IVCD of 12 mm or IVCCI of 50% or less, 144 were enrolled. There were 86 REPLETED and 58 NONREPLETED. Demographics, initial hemodynamics, or laboratory measures were not significantly different. NONREPLETED had smaller IVCD (6.0 ± 3.7 mm vs. 14.2 ± 4.3 mm, p < 0.001) and higher IVCCI (41.7% ± 30.0% vs. 13.2% ± 12.7%, p < 0.001) but no significant difference in IJVD or IJVCCI. REPLETED had greater 24FR than NONREPLETED (2503 ± 1751 mL vs. 1,243 ± 1,130 mL, p = 0.003). Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicates IVCDMIN predicted 24FR (area under the curve [AUC], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-0.84; p < 0.001) as did IVCCI (AUC, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85; p < 0.001) but not IJVDMIN (AUC, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.60; p = 0.747) or IJVCI (AUC, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.42-0.67; p = 0.591).

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound assessed IVCDMIN and IVCCI response initial resuscitation predicts 24-hour fluid resuscitation requirements.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic tests or criteria, level II.

Comparability of size measurements of the pancreas in magnetic resonance imaging and transabdominal ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

Transabdominal ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are commonly used for the examination of the pancreas in clinical routine. We therefore were interested in the concordance of these two imaging methods for the size measurement of the pancreas and how age, gender, and body mass index (BMI) affect the organ size.

METHODS

A total of 342 participants from the Study of Health in Pomerania underwent whole-body MRI and transabdominal US on the same day, and the diameter of the pancreatic head, body, and tail were measured. The agreement between US and MRI measurements was assessed by Bland and Altman plots. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to compare observers. A multivariable regression model was applied using the independent variables age, gender, and body mass index.

RESULTS

Compared to MRI, abdominal US returned smaller values for each segment of the pancreas, with a high level of inconsistency between these two methods. The mean difference was 0.39, 0.18, and 0.54 cm for the head, body, and tail, respectively. A high interobserver variability was detected for US. Multivariable analysis showed that pancreatic size in all three segments increased with BMI in both genders whereas pancreatic head and tail size decreased with age, an effect more marked in women.

CONCLUSIONS

Agreement of pancreatic size measurements is poor between US and MRI. These limitations should be considered when evaluating morphologic features for pathologic conditions or setting limits of normal size. Adjustments for BMI, gender, and age may also be warranted.

Radiologic Modalities and Response Assessment Schemes for Clinical and Preclinical Oncology Imaging

Clinical drug trials for oncology have resulted in universal protocols for medical imaging in order to standardize protocols for image procurement, radiologic interpretation, and therapeutic response assessment. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in using large animal models to study oncologic disease, though few standards currently exist for imaging of large animal models. This article briefly reviews medical imaging modalities, the current state-of-the-art in radiologic diagnostic criteria and response assessment schemes for evaluating therapeutic response and disease progression, and translation of radiologic imaging protocols and standards to large animal models of malignant disease.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in pediatric blunt abdominal trauma

Baseline ultrasound is the first-choice technique in traumatic hemodynamically stable children, and is essential in the early assessment of unstable patients to detect hemoperitoneum or other potentially fatal conditions. Despite the technological advancements in new ultrasound equipment and the experience of the operators, it is not always possible to rule out the presence of parenchymal traumatic lesions by means of baseline ultrasound nor to suspect them, especially in the absence of hemoperitoneum. For this reason, in the last decades, basic ultrasound has been associated with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to evaluate the stable little patient in cases such as low-energy blunt abdominal trauma. Because it relies on second-generation contrast agents, the CEUS technique allows for better detection of parenchymal injuries. CEUS has been demonstrated to be almost as sensitive as contrast-enhanced CT in the detection of traumatic injuries in patients affected by low-energy isolated abdominal trauma, with levels of sensitivity and specificity up to 95%. A very important point in favor of CEUS is its capacity to help distinguish the healthy patient, who can be discharged, from the one needing prolonged monitoring, operative management or hospitalization. Finally, we also have the ability to follow-up on low-grade traumatic lesions using CEUS, always keeping in mind patients' clinical conditions and their hemodynamics.

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.

Ruling out intra-abdominal injuries in blunt trauma patients using clinical criteria and abdominal ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

to identify victims of blunt abdominal trauma in which intra-abdominal injuries can be excluded by clinical criteria and by complete abdominal ultrasonography.

METHODS

retrospective analysis of victims of blunt trauma in which the following clinical variables were analyzed: hemodynamic stability, normal neurologic exam at admission, normal physical exam of the chest at admission, normal abdomen and pelvis physical exam at admission and absence of distracting lesions (Abbreviated Injury Scale >2 at skull, thorax and/or extremities). The ultrasound results were then studied in the group of patients with all clinical variables evaluated.

RESULTS

we studied 5536 victims of blunt trauma. Intra-abdominal lesions with AIS>1 were identified in 144 (2.6%); in patients with hemodynamic stability they were present in 86 (2%); in those with hemodynamic stability and normal neurological exam at admission in 50 (1.8%); in patients with hemodynamic stability and normal neurological and chest physical exam at admission, in 39 (1.5%); in those with hemodynamic stability, normal neurological, chest, abdominal and pelvic physical exam at admission, in 12 (0.5%); in patients with hemodynamic stability, normal neurological, chest, abdominal and pelvic physical exam at admission, and absence of distracting lesions, only two (0.1%) had intra-abdominal lesions. Among those with all clinical variables, 693 had normal total abdominal ultrasound, and, within this group, there were no identified intra-abdominal lesions.

CONCLUSION

when all clinical criteria and total abdominal ultrasound are associated, it is possible to identify a group of victims of blunt trauma with low chance of significant intra-abdominal lesions.

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.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound performed under urgent conditions. Indications, review of the technique, clinical examples and limitations

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is an imaging technique with various indications, most of which refer to scheduled examinations. However, CEUS can also be performed under urgent conditions for the investigation of many different clinical questions. This article reviews basic physics of ultrasound contrast agents and examines the commonest urgent clinical applications of CEUS. These include, among others, abdominal solid organ trauma and infarcts, scrotal and penile pathology and blood vessel imaging. Patients can be examined with a very short time delay at their bedside, without exposure to ionising radiation or risk of anaphylactic reaction and renal failure, while contraindications are minimal. CEUS technique is described for various urgent indications and imaging examples from our department's experience are presented. Safety matters and limitations of CEUS are also mentioned. Teaching Points • Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) can be performed urgently for various clinical applications. • Abdominal indications include solid organ trauma and infarcts. • CEUS in abdominal organ trauma correlates well with CT and can replace it for patient follow-up. • CEUS images testicular torsion, infection and infarction, as well as testicular and penile trauma. • Blood vessels can be assessed with CEUS for obstruction, aneurysm, thrombosis and dissection.

Evaluation of gastrointestinal injury in blunt abdominal trauma "FAST is not reliable": the role of repeated ultrasonography

BACKGROUND

To determine the diagnostic Accuracy of Focused Assessment Sonography for Trauma (FAST) and repeated FAST in the patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

In this retrospective study we collected the data of all patients from September 2007 to July 2011 with gastrointestinal injury. The intraoperative outcome was compared with FAST technique and the repeated or delayed sonography.

RESULTS

A total number of 1550 patients with blunt abdominal trauma underwent FAST in a period of 4 years in our hospital. Eighty-eight (5.67%) patients were found to have gastrointestinal injury after exploratory laparotomy. Fifty-five (62.5%) patients had isolated gastrointestinal injury and 33 (37.5%) patients had concomitant injury to the other solid organs. In those with isolated gastrointestinal injury, the sensitivity of FAST was 38.5%. Repeated ultrsonography was performed in 34 patients with false negative initial FAST after 12-24 hours. The sensitivity of repeated ultrasonography in negative initial FAST patients in detection of gastrointestinal injury was 85.2% (95% CI, 68.1%, and 94.4%).

CONCLUSION

Repeated sonography after 12 to 24 hours in patients with negative initial FAST but sustain abdominal symptom can facilitated a diagnosis of GI tract injury and can be as effective method instead of Computed tomography in developing country.

Introduction of QUIP (quality information program) as a semi-automated quality assessment endeavor allowing retrospective review of errors in cross-sectional abdominal imaging

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to review the role of a quality information program (QUIP) as a semiautomated educational feedback mechanism and to review common errors in cross-sectional abdominal and pelvic studies as an initiative for continuing medical education and improving patient care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Abdominal and pelvic errors identified by QUIP and cases collected from morbidity and mortality conferences were reviewed. Errors were classified and graded to levels of morbidity.

RESULTS

There were 222 errors in 218 patients over 4 years in this study. One hundred thirteen (51%) were identified after the introduction of QUIP (January to December 2009). One hundred thirty-eight studies (61%) were read independently, while 84 (39%) were double-read. Sixty-five percent of errors (145 of 222) were false-negatives, of which 45 (31%) were "satisfaction-of-search" errors. There were 62 cognitive errors (28%), nine technical errors (4%), eight communication errors (4%), six ordering errors (3%), and five false-positives identified. Seventy-six percent of errors were identified on computed tomography (n = 168); fewer cases involved ultrasound (n = 20 [9%]) and magnetic resonance (n = 34 [15%]). Forty-one percent resulted in no changes to patient outcomes. Forty-percent caused minor patient morbidity, and 19% caused major patient morbidity, including three cases (1%) that likely contributed to patient death.

CONCLUSIONS

Most abdominopelvic errors in this study were classified as false-negatives. Many can be attributed to satisfaction-of-search errors. Implementing a simple, semiautomated QUIP allows timely feedback regarding errors to radiologists. This may improve the quality of health care while allowing radiologists the opportunity to learn from each case they are involved in.

Association of shock, coagulopathy, and initial vital signs with massive transfusion in combat casualties

BACKGROUND

Timely initiation of a massive transfusion (MT) protocol is associated with improved survival and reduced transfusion for patients requiring MT; however, a priori identification of this population is difficult. The objective of this study was to compare the results of an MT prediction model and actual MT incidence in combat casualties.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the Joint Theater Trauma Registry transfusion database for all US service personnel injured in combat during overseas contingency operations who received at least 1 unit of blood. Systolic blood pressure at the time of admission, heart rate, hemoglobin, international normalized ratio, and base deficit were used in a previously developed prediction model for MT.

RESULTS

Casualties (n = 1124) were identified who had received at least 1 unit of blood and had all data points. Of these patients, 420 patients (37%) received an MT. Subjects presenting with any two of four possible variables (heart rate >110, systolic blood pressure <110 mm Hg, base deficit < or = -6, and hemoglobin <11) had a 54% incidence of MT with a model sensitivity of 69%. Patients predicted but not observed to receive an MT had earlier time of death and an increased incidence of head injuries compared with those predicted and observed to receive an MT. Patients not predicted but observed to receive an MT had increased chest, abdominal, and extremity injuries than those neither predicted nor observed to receive an MT.

CONCLUSION

The decision to implement an MT seems to rely heavily on clinical evaluation of severity of abdominal and extremity injury rather than physiologic derangement. Using a model based on the physiologic parameters--a more objective measure--may decrease mortality in combat casualties.

Contrast-enhanced US evaluation in patients with blunt abdominal trauma()

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 133 hemodynamically stable patients were evaluated using ultrasonography (US), CEUS and multislice Computer Tomography (CT) da eliminare.

RESULTS

In 133 patients, CT identified 84 lesions: 48 cases of splenic injury, 21 of liver injury, 13 of kidney or adrenal gland injury and 2 of pancreatic injury. US identified free fluid or parenchymal abnormalities in 59/84 patients positive at CT and free fluid in 20/49 patients negative at CT. CEUS revealed 81/84 traumatic injuries identified at CT and ruled out traumatic injuries in 48/49 negative at CT. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for US were 70.2%, 59.2%, 74.7% and 53.7%, respectively; for CEUS the values were 96.4%, 98%, 98.8% and 94.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that CEUS is more accurate than US and nearly as accurate as CT, and CEUS can therefore be proposed for the initial evaluation of patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in blunt abdominal trauma: considerations after 5 years of experience

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic capability of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in a large series of patients with blunt abdominal trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied 133 haemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Patients were assessed by ultrasonography (US), CEUS and multislice computed tomography (MSCT) with and without administration of a contrast agent. The study was approved by our hospital ethics committee (clinical study no. 1/2004/O).

RESULTS

In the 133 selected patients, CT identified 84 lesions; namely, 48 splenic, 21 hepatic, 13 renal or adrenal and two pancreatic. US identified free fluid or parenchymal alterations in 59/84 patients with positive CT and free fluid in 20/49 patients with negative CT. CEUS detected 81/84 traumatic lesions identified on CT and ruled out traumatic lesions in 48/49 patients with negative CT. The sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of US were 70.2%, 59.2%, 74.7% and 53.7%, respectively, whereas those of CEUS were 96.4%, 98%, 98.8% and 94.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that CEUS is an accurate technique for evaluating traumatic lesions of solid abdominal organs. The technique is able to detect active bleeding and vascular lesions, avoids exposure to ionising radiation and is useful for monitoring patients undergoing conservative treatment.

Detection of focal liver lesions: from the subjectivity of conventional ultrasound to the objectivity of volume ultrasound

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to establish the reliability of automated volumetric liver scans in detecting focal liver lesions by evaluating the degree of agreement between conventional and volume ultrasound (US) examinations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over a period of 3 months, we prospectively studied 100 consecutive patients (36 men and 64 women; age range 15-87 years; mean age 63 years) referred to our institute for US imaging of the liver. Volumetric acquisition of the liver was achieved with a 3D transducer (2.0-5.0 MHz) and a Logiq 9 US scanner. All patients underwent both 2- and 3D US studies performed by two expert radiologists. Volumetric acquisitions were subsequently reviewed by the second radiologist, who was blinded to the first radiologist's report. Three categories were established: 1=presence of focal liver lesions; 2=doubtful finding; 3=absence of focal liver lesions. Concordance between volume US and conventional US was calculated by using the k statistic.

RESULTS

Out of 100 patients examined, 39 were found to be affected by focal liver lesions. All volume US examinations were technically adequate, allowing exploration of all hepatic sectors, except for five cases that were marred by major respiratory motion artefacts. Conventional and volume US identified the same number of focal liver lesions, with the exception of four cases of doubtful findings at volume US. Concordance between automated volume US and conventional US of the liver was high (k=0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of focal liver lesions on automated volume US is possible, and the examination shows a high level of concordance with conventional US.

Emergency real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for detection of solid organ injuries

BACKGROUND

There is no controversy about the use of CT for detection of internal injuries in patients with high-energy multitrauma. However, in most patients isolated blunt abdominal trauma is mild or moderate and the risk of injury to organs other than the liver, spleen or kidneys is minimal. CT scanning exposes patients to radiation, and may often be avoided if significant damage to these three organs can be visualized by contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our series SonoVue (Bracco, Milan) and Siemens Acuson Sequoia ultrasound machines were used. Initially patients with injuries detected by CT were examined using CEUS. Subsequently CEUS was used as the first and only modality in patients with mild or moderate blunt abdominal trauma to one flank, provided that they were able to cooperate and were otherwise suitable for US examination.

RESULTS

CEUS was able to sensitively detect lacerations and haematomas in the liver, spleen and kidneys in cooperative patients. CEUS also demonstrated very thin lacerations of the parenchyma of these organs. These results were also found in children.

CONCLUSION

In our experience CEUS is an accurate and valuable tool for the detection or exclusion of parenchymal damage to the liver, spleen and kidneys. With the proper organization, standardized dynamic documentation and well-trained sonographers, CEUS may replace CT in many patients with mild to moderate blunt abdominal trauma, thus avoiding unnecessary exposure to radiation in this often young and healthy population.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound for Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Sonography is widely used in the initial diagnostic assessment of blunt abdominal trauma in adults and children. It has been formally incorporated worldwide into the routine armamentarium available for emergency diagnosis and treatment as a means of rapid detection of free abdominal fluid, normally referred to as FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma). However, there is some controversy regarding its value because free abdominal fluid may be lacking in patients with abdominal organ injuries from blunt trauma. More recently, a new ultrasound technique has been developed using contrast agents. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound performs better than the non-contrast-enhanced technique for the detection of abdominal solid organ injuries and can play an important role in the prompt evaluation of patients with blunt trauma. Furthermore, contrast-enhanced ultrasound can be used in the follow-up of patients who have solid organ lesions and are managed with nonoperative treatment, avoiding radiation and iodinated contrast medium exposure.

The Utility of Sonography for the Triage of Blunt Abdominal Trauma Patients to Exploratory Laparotomy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) in the triage of hypotensive and normotensive blunt abdominal trauma patients to exploratory laparotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data entered in a trauma registry database were retrospectively reviewed and were correlated with medical records, radiology reports, and surgical laparotomy reports. In the setting of blunt abdominal trauma, hypotensive patients were compared with normotensive patients who underwent FAST.

RESULTS

During the 6-year study period, 4,029 patients with blunt abdominal trauma underwent sonography, 122 of whom were hypotensive on arrival and underwent FAST. Of 87 hypotensive patients with positive findings on FAST, 69 (79%) were taken directly to exploratory laparotomy without the need for CT. In predicting the need for therapeutic laparotomy in hypotensive patients, the sensitivity of FAST was 85%, specificity was 60%, and accuracy was 77%. Of the 3,907 normotensive patients, 3,584 had negative FAST findings, whereas 323 had positive FAST findings. In normotensive patients, the sensitivity of FAST was 85%, specificity was 96%, and accuracy was 96%. In the combined patient population (all hypotensive and normotensive patients), 4,029 patients with blunt abdominal trauma underwent sonography: 3,619 had negative and 410 had positive FAST findings. In all patients regardless of blood pressure, the sensitivity of FAST was 85%, specificity was 96%, and accuracy was 95%.

CONCLUSION

Hypotensive patients screened in the emergency department with positive FAST findings may be triaged directly to therapeutic laparotomy, depending on the results of the sonography examination, without the need for CT.

Blunt abdominal trauma: emergency contrast-enhanced sonography for detection of solid organ injuries

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to prospectively compare the diagnostic value of sonography and contrast-enhanced sonography with CT for the detection of solid organ injuries in blunt abdominal trauma patients.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Sonography, contrast-enhanced sonography, and CT were performed to assess possible abdominal organ injuries in 69 nonconsecutive hemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma and a strong clinical suspicion of abdominal lesions. Sonography and contrast-enhanced sonography findings were compared with CT findings, the reference standard technique.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients had 35 abdominal injuries on CT (10 kidney or adrenal lesions, seven liver lesions, 17 spleen lesions, and one retroperitoneal hematoma). Sixteen lesions were detected on sonography, and 32 were seen on contrast-enhanced sonography. The sensitivity and specificity of sonography were 45.7% and 91.8%, respectively, and the positive and negative predictive values were 84.2% and 64.1%, respectively. Contrast-enhanced sonography had a sensitivity of 91.4%, a specificity of 100%, and positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 92.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Contrast-enhanced sonography was found to be more sensitive than sonography and almost as sensitive as CT in the detection of traumatic abdominal solid organ injuries. It can therefore be proposed as a useful tool in the assessment of blunt abdominal trauma.