Sonography as the primary screening technique for blunt abdominal trauma: experience with 899 patients

Abdominal trauma

Traumatic injuries are the leading cause of death in people aged<45 years, and abdominal trauma is a source of significant morbidity and mortality and high economic costs. Imaging has a fundamental role in abdominal trauma, where CT is a fundamental tool for rapid, accurate diagnosis that will be key for patients' clinical outcomes.

Imaging of blunt bowel and mesenteric injuries: Current status

Blunt abdominal trauma often presents a diagnostic challenge. Clinical examination demonstrates low reliability in detecting abdominal injury (16 %) when there is a history of head injury or loss of consciousness. This can prove detrimental, as delays in the diagnosis of traumatic bowel injury of 8 h or less can result in increased morbidity and mortality, as well as prolonged hospitalization. Although hemodynamically unstable patients will require an urgent laparotomy following clinical assessment, MDCT is the modality of choice for comprehensive imaging of blunt abdominal trauma in hemodynamically stable patients. Despite the use of MDCT, blunt injury to the bowel and mesentery, which accounts for up to 5% of injuries in cases of trauma, may be difficult to detect. The use of a constellation of direct and indirect signs on MDCT can help make the diagnosis and guide clinical management. Direct signs on MDCT, such as bowel wall discontinuity, and extraluminal gas may assist in the diagnosis of traumatic bowel injury. However, these signs are not sensitive. Therefore, the astute radiologist may have to rely on indirect signs of injury, such as free fluid, bowel wall thickening, and abnormal bowel wall enhancement to make the diagnosis. This review will focus on MDCT imaging findings of bowel and mesenteric injuries secondary to blunt abdominal trauma.

Free Fluid Accumulation following Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Potential for Expansion of the Fast Protocol

Objective

To determine sites of free intra-peritoneal fluid collection following blunt abdominal trauma, with a view to refinement of the Focused Assessment by Sonography for Trauma (FAST) protocol.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study of CT scans of subjects who had suffered blunt abdominal trauma and had free intra-peritoneal fluid detected on CT scan within 24 hours. The depth from the skin and amount of fluid at 14 abdominal sites were determined.

Results

CT scans of 105 patients were examined: 68 (64.8%) were male, mean age 36.7±18.4 years, mean injury severity score 25.4±11.6. Fluid collected most commonly at three sites: right mid-axillary line at the level of the xiphisternum (52 patients, 49.5%), lateral margin of the right rectus muscle at the level of the anterior superior iliac spine (49 patients, 46.7%) and right mid-axillary line at the level of the umbilicus (40 patients, 38.1%). Mean depth of fluid at these sites were 3.6, 3.6 and 4.2 cm, respectively.

Conclusions

Free fluid collects commonly in the area of the right iliac fossa following blunt abdominal trauma. The inclusion of this site in the FAST protocol may increase the ultrasonographic detection of free fluid in the acute trauma setting.

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.

Complete ultrasonography of trauma in screening blunt abdominal trauma patients is equivalent to computed tomographic scanning while reducing radiation exposure and cost

BACKGROUND

Liberal use of computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) in the screening of blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) has heightened concerns for increased radiation exposure and costs. We sought to demonstrate that in a select group of BAT patients, complete ultrasonography of trauma (CUST) is equivalent to routine CTAP but with significantly decreased radiation and costs.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients screened for BAT from 2000 to 2011 in a Level 1 trauma center was performed. CUST was available from 8:00 AM to 11:00 PM daily, while CTAP was performed thereafter. Decision to perform CTAP or CUST overnight was made by the attending surgeon based on clinical examination. False negatives (FNs) were described as either a negative CUST or CTAP finding, which later required exploratory laparotomy. Medicare rates and previous data were used for the estimation of cost and radiation exposure.

RESULTS

There were 19,128 patients screened for BAT. A total of 12,577 patients (65.8%) initially underwent CUST, and 6,548 (34.2%) underwent CTAP; 11,059 patients (58% of the total BAT patients) avoided a CTAP, yielding an estimated savings of $6.5 million and 188,003 mSv less radiation during the course of the study. Compared with the CTAP group, patients undergoing CUST had lower Injury Severity Score (ISS) (8.1 vs. 9.6), were older (44.7 years vs. 35.2 years), and experienced less traumatic brain injury (61.4% vs. 69.3%) (all with p < 0.002). Mortality was higher in the CUST group (1.8% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.02), but it was insignificant when adjusted for age older than 65 years (1.1% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.23) or head injury (0.6% and 0.3%, p = 0.4). FN CUST and FN CTAP were 0.29% and 0.1%, respectively (p = nonsignificant), with similar mortality (20% vs. 0%, p = 0.44).

CONCLUSION

CUST is equivalent to routine CTAP for BAT screening and leads to an average of 42% less radiation exposure and more than $591,000 savings per year.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic study, level IV; therapeutic/care management study, level IV.

Imaging assessment of renal injuries in children and adolescents: CT or ultrasound?

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of the ALARA ("as low as reasonably achievable") concept, ultrasound (US) has been progressively advocated for paediatric diagnostic imaging. This study aimed to analyse the role and accuracy of US in paediatric renal trauma.

METHODS

From 1999 to 2009, the tertiary-care-hospital database was retrospectively evaluated for renal trauma with regards to aetiology, type of injury, diagnostics, management and outcome.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (29 males, 18 females; median age=14years, range 1-17 years) were identified. US was initially applied in 45 patients with correct results in 86.6%. Computed tomography (CT) was performed in 16 patients in the acute trauma setting - complementary to US in 14 cases, with a diagnostic accuracy of 93%. Most renal injuries were grade I° (n=30), followed by grade III° (n=8), IV° (n=5), and II°/V° (n=2 each). All patients were initially managed conservatively and followed by US. Clinical deterioration necessitated surgery in four patients (2 nephrectomies, 1 partial nephrectomy, 1 urinoma drainage). The outcome was generally favourable with a renal preservation rate of 95%.

CONCLUSION

With respect to the ALARA principle, US can be safely and reliably applied as the first-line diagnostic imaging technique and for follow-up for suspected traumatic paediatric renal injuries.

Blunt abdominal trauma: imaging and intervention

Interventional radiology, particularly percutaneous angioembolization, plays an important role in the management of blunt abdominal trauma involving solid organs and pelvic fractures. The traumatic injuries of the central nervous system, heart, and great vessels often lead to death at the site of trauma. Although patients with visceral organ injuries can also die at the site of trauma, these patients often reach the hospital thus giving us an opportunity to treat them with surgical or radiological intervention depending on the clinical condition of the patient. The management of these patients with trauma is now well codified-patients who remain unstable despite resuscitation should be shifted either to an operating room for laparotomy if the ultrasound (US) revealed hemoperitoneum or to a interventional room for angioembolization in cases of pelvic fractures. In all other cases, computed tomography is essential. Currently, multidetector computed tomography with contrast is the gold standard imaging modality for the diagnosis of traumatic abdominal injuries; it helps in assessing the extent of injuries, and further management can be planned.

Multidetector CT of blunt abdominal trauma

The morbidity, mortality, and economic costs resulting from trauma in general, and blunt abdominal trauma in particular, are substantial. The "panscan" (computed tomographic [CT] examination of the head, neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis) has become an essential element in the early evaluation and decision-making algorithm for hemodynamically stable patients who sustained abdominal trauma. CT has virtually replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage for the detection of important injuries. Over the past decade, substantial hardware and software developments in CT technology, especially the introduction and refinement of multidetector scanners, have expanded the versatility of CT for examination of the polytrauma patient in multiple facets: higher spatial resolution, faster image acquisition and reconstruction, and improved patient safety (optimization of radiation delivery methods). In this article, the authors review the elements of multidetector CT technique that are currently relevant for evaluating blunt abdominal trauma and describe the most important CT signs of trauma in the various organs. Because conservative nonsurgical therapy is preferred for all but the most severe injuries affecting the solid viscera, the authors emphasize the CT findings that are indications for direct therapeutic intervention.

Advances in imaging: ultrasound in every physician's pocket

Advances in medical ultrasound have made the modality widely applicable and the new cart-based and pocket size devices have allowed for relevant point-of-care (POC) ultrasound examinations in many medical specialties. POC ultrasonography is performed as a real-time examination assisting the physician in diagnosis, procedure or screening of the patient without life threatening delays. The examination can be performed at the bedside or wherever the patient may be present. Structured and focused protocols for simple clinical questions have been developed and implemented in the following specialties: Anesthesiology, Cardiology, Critical Care Medicine, Dermatology, Emergency Medicine, Neonatology, Gynecology and Rheumatology and many others. POC ultrasound, as well as ultrasound in general, is very user dependent and the need for quality assurance, formal education and practical training is obvious. With this in mind, POC ultrasound now really has the potential for becoming the physician's new personal universal examination tool. Patients admitted to emergency departments will be able to receive organ or symptom-guided initial focused ultrasound triage as part of the physician's first encounter with the patient. This will allow for more accurate referral, correct diagnosis and relevant screening in turn leading to better overall treatment results.

Management of duodenal injuries

Injuries to the duodenum pose a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge to the surgeon. Due to the intra- and extra-peritoneal location of the duodenum, the presentation can be overt or occult, and delay in diagnosis is associated with an increased mortality rate. A range of interventions have been described and this article reviews the relevant literature, highlights the salient points and suggests a treatment algorithm.

Sonography of the spleen

This pictorial essay will review and discuss the aspects of differential diagnosis with splenic sonography, including recent literature and exemplary pictorial sonographic cases. Although the spleen is well evaluated by computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, sonography has certain advantages, including its ubiquitous availability, lack of ionizing radiation, and low cost. Sonography of the spleen plays an important role in emergency diagnosis of splenic rupture and hemorrhage. The additional use of contrast-enhanced sonography can improve the diagnostic validity. Depending on the indication, sonography of the spleen is especially important for oncologic differential diagnosis of focal lesions, follow-up examinations, and image guidance of therapeutic interventions.

Improved patient management with point-of-care ultrasound

Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) is an examination often performed at the bedside that can assist in patient assessment and answer focused questions. It is increasingly used by a number of specialties to aid invasive procedures and for clinical evaluation, with the ultimate aim of improving patient management. Although there is a paucity of robust evidence supporting some applications, it is gaining popularity and has been termed the ‘new stethoscope’. Good clinical governance arrangements, especially with regard to training and competency, are key to this modality developing further and safely.

Management of liver trauma

BACKGROUND

Blunt and penetrating liver trauma is common and often presents major diagnostic and management problems.

METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to determine the current consensus on investigation and management strategies.

RESULTS

The liver is the most frequently injured organ following abdominal trauma. Immediate assessment with ultrasound has replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage in the resuscitation room, but computerised tomography remains the gold standard investigation. Nonoperative management is preferred in stable patients but laparotomy is indicated in unstable patients. Damage control techniques such as perihepatic packing, hepatotomy plus direct suture, and resectional debridement are recommended. Major complex surgical procedures such as anatomical resection or atriocaval shunting are now thought to be redundant in the emergency setting. Packing is also recommended for the inexperienced surgeon to allow control and stabilisation prior to transfer to a tertiary centre. Interventional radiological techniques are becoming more widely used, particularly in patients who are being managed nonoperatively or have been stabilised by perihepatic packing.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of liver injuries has evolved significantly throughout the last two decades. In the absence of other abdominal injuries, operative management can usually be avoided. Patients with more complex injuries or subsequent complications should be transferred to a specialist centre to optimise final outcome.

Management of liver trauma

BACKGROUND

Blunt and penetrating liver trauma is common and often presents major diagnostic and management problems.

METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to determine the current consensus on investigation and management strategies.

RESULTS

The liver is the most frequently injured organ following abdominal trauma. Immediate assessment with ultrasound has replaced diagnostic peritoneal lavage in the resuscitation room, but computerised tomography remains the gold standard investigation. Nonoperative management is preferred in stable patients but laparotomy is indicated in unstable patients. Damage control techniques such as perihepatic packing, hepatotomy plus direct suture, and resectional debridement are recommended. Major complex surgical procedures such as anatomical resection or atriocaval shunting are now thought to be redundant in the emergency setting. Packing is also recommended for the inexperienced surgeon to allow control and stabilisation prior to transfer to a tertiary centre. Interventional radiological techniques are becoming more widely used, particularly in patients who are being managed nonoperatively or have been stabilised by perihepatic packing.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of liver injuries has evolved significantly throughout the last two decades. In the absence of other abdominal injuries, operative management can usually be avoided. Patients with more complex injuries or subsequent complications should be transferred to a specialist centre to optimise final outcome.

Is the FAST exam reliable in severely injured patients?

INTRODUCTION

Highly sensitive and accurate for the detection of injuries requiring intervention in haemodynamically unstable patients, FAST may underestimate intra-abdominal injuries in stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Diminished accuracy of ultrasound has been reported in different cohorts of multiple injured patients. We hypothesised that multiple injured patients with a high Injury Severity Score (ISS) will have a decreased accuracy of FAST for the assessment of blunt abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Data from the trauma registry of a Level 1 trauma centre were retrospectively reviewed. All haemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients who underwent both FAST and CT scan of abdomen from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2005 were included in the cohort. All patients were divided into three groups according to their ISS: Group 1 included patients with an ISS from 1 to 14, Group 2 included patients with an ISS from 16 to 24, and Group 3 consisted of patients with ISS>or=25.

RESULTS

3181 patients with blunt abdominal trauma included into the study were divided into the three groups according to the ISS. The mean ISS was 7.9+/-3.97, 19.6+/-2.48 and 41.3+/-11.95 in Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The accuracy of ultrasound was 90.6% in the group of patients with the highest ISS (>or=25) compared with 97.5 and 97.1 for Groups 1 and 2 (p<0.001). Similarly, ultrasound had a significantly lower sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for patients in Group 3 compared with the first two groups (p<0.001). There was a significantly lower sensitivity in Group 2 compared with Group 1 (p<0.001), but no differences in specificity, accuracy, PPV or NPV were demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

Patients with high ISS are at increased risk of having ultrasound-occult injuries and have a lower accuracy of their ultrasound examination than patients with low and moderate ISS.

The value of focused assessment with sonography in trauma examination for the need for operative intervention in blunt torso trauma: a rebuttal to “emergency ultrasound-based algorithms for diagnosing blunt abdominal trauma (review)”, from the Cochrane Collaboration

Background and significance

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews published a manuscript critical of the use of the FAST examination. The reference is Stengel D. Bauwens K. Sehouli J. Rademacher G. Mutze S. Ekkernkamp A. Porzsolt F. Emergency ultrasound-based algorithms for diagnosing blunt abdominal trauma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. (2):CD004446, 2005. UI: 15846717. The stated objective was the assessment of the “efficiency and effectiveness” of ultrasound-inclusive evaluative algorithms in patients with suspected blunt abdominal trauma (BAT). The primary outcome measures explored were Mortality, CT and DPL use, and laparotomy rates. Little or no benefit was seen and the conclusion was that “there is insufficient evidence from randomized controlled trials to justify promotion” of FAST in patients with BAT. While the review used the same rigorous methods employed in all Cochrane Reviews, it appears that several serious flaws plagued the manuscript. The finest methodological rigor cannot yield usable results, if it is not applied to a clinically relevant question. In a world of increasingly conservative management of BAT, do we need FAST, a rapid, repeatable screening modality at the point-of-care to visualize any amount of free fluid or any degree of organ injury? The obvious answer is no. However, quantifying the value of FAST to predict the need for immediate operative intervention (OR) is essential.

Methods

To rebut this recurrent review, a systematic literature review was conducted using verbatim methodologies as described in the Cochrane Review with the exception of telephone contacts. Data were tabulated and presented descriptively.

Results

Out of 487 citations, 163 articles were fully screened, 11 contained prospectively derived data with FAST results, patient disposition and final diagnoses, and a description of cases considered false negatives or false positives. Of the 2,755 patients, 448 (16%) went to the OR. There were a total of 5 patients with legitimately false-negative diagnoses made based on the FAST: 3 involving inadequate scans and 2 of blunt trauma-induced small bowel perforations without hemoperitoneum.

Conclusion

The FAST examination, adequately completed, is a nearly perfect test for predicting a “Need for OR” in patients with blunt torso trauma.

Findings and limitations of focused ultrasound as a possible screening test in stable adult patients with blunt abdominal trauma: a Greek study

Our objective is to underline the place of FAST (focus assessment by sonography for trauma) ultrasonography (US) in the investigation of blunt abdominal trauma. We retrospectively examined the ultrasound findings in 1,999 haemodynamically stable adult patients. These people were admitted to the emergency room (ER) for possible blunt abdominal trauma. All were stable at admission and a FAST ultrasound examination was made. Initial findings were compared with the clinical course after at least 24 h of observation time and CT results. Among the 1,999 US examinations, abnormalities were found in 109 (5.5%) cases. Among them, 102 had free peritoneal fluid, and in 58 examinations, ruptures, lacerations or haematomas were demonstrated. Despite its limitations, such as in cases involving uncooperative patients, excessive bowel gas, obesity and empty bladder, the FAST technique seems to be an accurate method to evaluate the possibility of abdominal blunt trauma in stable patients. Because of the high negative predictive value of the FAST technique in stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma, we recommend that a stable patient with negative ultrasound results at admission remain under close observation for at least 12 or preferably 24 h before being discharged.

CEUS in abdominal trauma: multi-center study

The objective of this study was to evaluate the concordance of US and contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) with CT in the assessment of solid organ injury following blunt trauma. Patients underwent complete US examination, including free fluid search and solid organ analysis. CEUS followed, using low-mechanical index techniques and SonoVue. CT was performed within 1 h. Among 156 enrolled patients, 91 had one or more abnormalities (n = 107) at CT: 26 renal, 38 liver, 43 spleen. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for renal trauma at baseline US were 36%, 98%, and 88%, respectively, after CEUS values increased to 69%, 99%, and 94%. For liver baseline US values were 68%, 97%, and 90%; after CEUS were 84%, 99%, and 96%. For spleen, results were 77%, 96%, and 91% at baseline US and 93%, 99%, and 97% after CEUS. Per patient evaluation gave the following results in terms of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy: 79%, 82%, 80% at baseline US; 94%, 89%, and 92% following CEUS. CEUS is more sensitive than US in the detection of solid organ injury, potentially reducing the need for further imaging. False negatives from CEUS are due to minor injuries, without relevant consequences for patient management and prognosis.

Imaging children with abdominal trauma

OBJECTIVE

Trauma is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children. The abdomen is the second most common site of injury. This article discusses abdominal trauma in children.

CONCLUSION

The clinical evaluation of children with potential blunt abdominal injury presents a challenging task. Therefore, imaging plays an essential role in the evaluation of such children.

Current Recommendations for Imaging in the Management of Urologic Traumas

Three percent to 10% of trauma patients have genitourinary tract injuries. Radiologic imaging is essential for making the correct diagnosis and managing it appropriately. Which modality is appropriate is based on the mechanism of injury and patient presentation. Patients with pelvic injuries and gross hematuria should undergo either CT cystography or conventional cystography. Ultrasound is warranted in patients with scrotal trauma when physical exam is inconclusive. Patients with penetrating trauma to the external genitalia, who suffer blunt trauma to the penis, or who present with gross hematuria, blood at the meatus, inability to void, perineal/scrotal ecchymosis, or abnormal digital rectal exam should undergo retrograde urethrography. Using these criteria for imaging should lead to the proper diagnosis and minimize patient morbidity.

Colour Doppler ultrasound patterns and clinical follow-up of incidentally found hypoechoic, vascular tumours of the spleen: evidence for a benign tumour

Between January 1990 and January 2005, incidental hypoechoic, vascular tumours of the spleen were identified in 13 patients using B-mode and colour Doppler ultrasound (CDS). All lesions found were well demarcated, intrasplenically located, and ranged in size between 1 cm and 4 cm. The increased vascular pattern on CDS was confirmed in 9 of the 13 cases by contrast enhanced ultrasound (CES), while two patients showed reduced vascularity on CES. In 10 patients, lesions were confirmed by contrast enhanced CT. Histological examination was performed in three patients with the diagnosis of capillary haemangioma (n = 2) and hamartoma (n = 1). In the remaining cases, ultrasound follow-up was performed (range 4 months to 13 years) and demonstrated no evidence of tumour growth in all but one patient. During a 4 year follow-up, one lesion increased in size from 1.0 cm to 1.5 cm and in the same patient an additional 0.5 cm sized hypoechoic increased vascular lesion was also found. In the spleen a hypoechoic lesion with an increased vascular pattern incidentally found by ultrasound most likely indicates a benign tumour with capillary haemangioma/hamartoma as the most likely diagnosis. However, it should be emphasised that in all cases a careful ultrasound follow-up is warranted.

Contrast-enhanced sonography for differential diagnosis of an inhomogeneous spleen of unknown cause in patients with pain in the left upper quadrant

OBJECTIVE

Second-generation contrast agents have shown spleen-specific uptake. The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of contrast-enhanced sonography (CES) to demarcate splenic lesions in patients with pain in the left upper quadrant (LUQ) and an inhomogeneous splenic texture.

METHODS

From October 2003 to July 2005, 31 consecutive patients with pain in the LUQ and splenic inhomogeneity on B-mode sonography were studied by CES using a second-generation contrast agent (SonoVue; Bracco SpA, Milan, Italy). The following data were retrospectively evaluated: extent of enhancement (EE) of the spleen and focal splenic lesions was determined and classified, with the EE of surrounding tissue used as an in vivo reference. Focal splenic lesions were classified after CES as round or wedge shaped, solitary or multiple, and anechoic, hypoechoic, or hyperechoic.

RESULTS

The EE of the spleen after CES was anechoic (n = 1), hypoechoic (n = 1), or hyperechoic (n = 29). In 16 of 31 patients, focal lesions were seen after CES. The EE of the lesions was anechoic (n = 11) or hypoechoic (n = 5). Lesions were solitary (n = 6) or multiple (n = 10) and round (n = 5) or wedge shaped (n = 11). Final clinical diagnoses of splenic abnormalities were no specific diagnosis (n = 13), complete autosplenectomy (n = 2), splenic lymphoma (n = 5), and splenic infarction (n = 11). The CES diagnoses were confirmed by computed tomography (n = 21), scintigraphy (n = 2), magnetic resonance imaging (n = 1), and clinical follow-up (n = 7).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with pain in the LUQ and splenic inhomogeneity, CES enables visualization of splenic abnormalities in more than 50% of the patients; in this group, splenic infarction was the most common diagnosis.

Randomized controlled clinical trial of point-of-care, limited ultrasonography for trauma in the emergency department: the first sonography outcomes assessment program trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Annually, 38 million people are evaluated for trauma, the leading cause of death in persons younger than 45 years. The primary objective is to assess whether using a protocol inclusive of point-of-care, limited ultrasonography (PLUS), compared to usual care (control), among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected torso trauma decreased time to operative care.

METHODS

The study was a randomized controlled clinical trial conducted during a 6-month period at 2 Level I trauma centers. The intervention was PLUS conducted by verified clinician sonographers. The primary outcome measure was time from ED arrival to transfer to operative care; secondary outcomes included computed tomography (CT) use, length of stay, complications, and charges. Regression models controlled for confounders and analyzed physician-to-physician variability. All analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Results are presented as mean, first-quartile, median, and third-quartile, with multiplicative change and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or percentage with odds ratio and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-four patients with suspected torso trauma were eligible; 136 patients lacked consent, and attending physicians refused enrollment of 46 patients. Two hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled: 135 PLUS patients and 127 controls. There were no important differences between groups. Time to operative care was 64% (48, 76) less for PLUS compared to control patients. PLUS patients underwent fewer CTs (odds ratio 0.16) (0.07, 0.32), spent 27% (1, 46) fewer days in hospital, and had fewer complications (odds ratio 0.16) (0.07, 0.32), and charges were 35% (19, 48) less compared to control.

CONCLUSION

A PLUS-inclusive protocol significantly decreased time to operative care in patients with suspected torso trauma, with improved resource use and lower charges.

Spleen and Retroperitoneum

This is a survey of normal variants and pathologic conditions involving the spleen and retroperitoneum. The study focuses on the various sonographic appearances of trauma, infection, and neoplasm involving these areas in an attempt to complement works dealing specifically with the pancreas, kidneys, and great vessels. Ultrasound-guided intervention (biopsy, drainage) is included.

Ultrasonography in patients without trauma in the emergency department: impact on discharge diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine to what extent findings on ultrasonography performed in the emergency department (ED) after hours confirm or alter the referral diagnosis in patients without trauma as reflected in the discharge diagnosis.

METHODS

In this prospective study, data from 136 ultrasonographic examinations performed in patients without trauma after hours in the ED during January and February 2002 were evaluated against the suspected preimaging diagnosis of the referring ED physician and the actual discharge diagnosis from the ED or after hospitalization. The rate of preimaging and postimaging concordance was statistically analyzed and compared by calculation of confidence intervals and by the McNemar test.

RESULTS

Normal ultrasonographic findings were documented in 54 patients (40%), and pathologic findings were documented in 82 (60%). Thirty-four (25%) of the 136 examinations were concordant with the initial referring physician's diagnosis. Of the 102 studies that were not concordant with the initial referral suspected diagnoses, that is, being either a study with normal findings or offering an alternative diagnosis, 81 (79.4%) were concordant with the discharge diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

After-hours ultrasonographic findings in patients without trauma seen in the ED seem to have a high impact on the discharge diagnosis and are concordant with it in more than 80% of cases.

Is definitive abdominal evaluation required in blunt trauma victims undergoing urgent extra-abdominal surgery?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the utility of routine abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scanning for abdominal evaluation of blunt trauma patients before urgent extra-abdominal surgery.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, we prospectively enrolled all blunt trauma patients at least 8 years of age presenting to the emergency department of a Level 1 trauma center who were initially considered to require urgent extra-abdominal surgery within 24 hours of presentation. Patients were excluded if they had any of the following: 1) isolated extremity trauma, 2) signs or symptoms of intra-abdominal injury (including systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg; abdominal, flank, or costal margin tenderness; abdominal wall contusion or abrasion; pelvic fracture; and gross hematuria), or 3) unreliable findings on abdominal examination (Glasgow Coma Scale score < 14, paralysis, or mental retardation). Clinical data were documented on a data sheet before abdominal CT scanning.

RESULTS

A total of 254 patients, with a mean (+/-SD) age of 32.3 (+/-16.1) years, were enrolled. A total of 201 patients ultimately underwent urgent extra-abdominal surgery for the following procedures: orthopedic, 182 (91%); facial, 17 (8%); laceration, 7 (3%); vascular, 6 (2%); neurosurgical, 3 (1%); urology, 2 (1%); and ophthalmology, 1 (0.4%). Three patients (1.2%; 95% confidence interval = 0.2% to 3.4%) were found to have intra-abdominal injuries. Two patients had splenic injuries that required only observation. One patient (0.4%; 95% confidence interval = 0% to 2.2%) underwent laparotomy. This patient sustained multiple injuries in a motorcycle crash, including splenic, kidney, and pancreatic injuries, and underwent a splenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal CT scanning has a low yield in trauma patients whose sole indication for diagnostic abdominal evaluation is the need for general anesthesia for urgent extra-abdominal surgery. A small percentage of these patients, however, will have important intra-abdominal injuries such that further refinement of the recommendations for diagnostic study in this select population is needed.

Association between compliance with methodological standards of diagnostic research and reported test accuracy: meta-analysis of focused assessment of US for trauma

PURPOSE

To study whether compliance with methodological standards affected the reported accuracy of screening ultrasonography (US) for trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Meta-analysis was conducted of prospective investigations in which US was compared with any diagnostic reference test in patients with suspected abdominal injury. Reports were retrieved from electronic databases without language restrictions; added information was gained with manual search. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological rigor by using 27 items contained in the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) checklist and the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy included in Systematic Reviews (QUADAS) instrument. Inconsistencies were resolved by means of consensus. Summary receiver operating characteristics and random-effects meta-regression were used to model the effect of methodological standards and other study features on US accuracy.

RESULTS

A total of 62 trials, which included a total of 18,167 participants, were eligible for meta-analysis. The average proportion of men or boys was 71.7%, the mean age was 30.6 years +/- 10.8 (standard deviation), and the mean injury severity score was 16.7 +/- 8.3. The prevalence of abdominal trauma was 25.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.1%, 29.1%). Pooled overall sensitivity and specificity of US were 78.9% (95% CI: 74.9%, 82.9%) and 99.2% (95% CI: 99.0%, 99.4%), respectively. Varying end points (hemoperitoneum or organ damage) did not change these results. US accuracy was much lower in children (sensitivity, 57.9%; specificity, 94.3%). Strong heterogeneity was observed in sensitivity, whereas specificity remained constant across trials. There was evidence of publication bias. Initial interobserver agreement with methodological standards ranged from poor (kappa = 0.03, independent verification of US findings) to perfect (kappa = 1.00, sufficiently short interval between US and reference test). By consensus, studies fulfilled a median of 13 methodological criteria (range, five to 20 criteria). In investigations that lacked individual methodological standards, researchers overestimated pooled sensitivity, with predicted differences of 9%-18%. The use of a single reference test, specification of the number of excluded patients, and calculation of CIs independently contributed to predicted sensitivity in a multivariate model. In 16 investigations (1309 subjects), a single reference test was used, which provided a combined sensitivity of 66.0% (95% CI: 56.2%, 75.8%).

CONCLUSION

Bias-adjusted sensitivity of screening US for trauma is low. Adherence to methodological standards included in appraisal instruments like STARD and QUADAS is crucial to obtain valid estimates of test accuracy.

Hypotensive Patients with Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Performance of Screening US

PURPOSE

To determine retrospectively the accuracy of screening ultrasonography (US) in patients with hypotension (systolic blood pressure <or= 90 mm Hg) after blunt abdominal trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The investigational review board approved the study and waived informed consent. The study group consisted of 128 hypotensive patients with blunt abdominal trauma who underwent screening US over a 9-year period. Abdomens were scanned for free fluid and for parenchymal heterogeneity in visceral organs; scans that depicted these were considered positive. Prospective reports were used to calculate diagnostic performance. Patients were retrospectively given a fluid score according to the number of fluid pockets visualized (0, 1, or > or =2) (consensus by three readers) and were assigned to a low- or high-risk group according to the presence of hematuria and/or axial fracture on radiographs. Screening US results were compared with findings with the best available reference standard (computed tomography [CT]), repeat US, other diagnostic test, laparotomy, autopsy, clinical course). Data were compared by using chi(2) or Fisher exact test, depending on expected frequencies, with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Continuous variables were compared by using unpaired Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test, depending on data distribution.

RESULTS

The study included 77 male and 51 female patients (mean age, 42 years). Sensitivity was 85% (44 of 52) for detection of any injuries, 97% (30 of 31) for surgical injuries (ie, injuries requiring surgery), and 100% (10 of 10) for fatal injuries. Specificity was 96% (73 of 76), 82% (80 of 97), and 69% (81 of 118), and accuracy was 91% (117 of 128), 86% (110 of 128), and 71% (91 of 128), for respective injury categories. One nonfatal surgical injury was missed in a high-risk patient. For each injury category, frequency of injury in patients with a fluid score of 2 or more was nine times that in patients with a score of 0 (P < .001 for all comparisons). Frequency of false-negative US findings in high-risk patients was eight times that in low-risk patients (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

In patients who are hypotensive after blunt abdominal trauma and not hemodynamically stable enough to undergo diagnostic CT, negative US findings virtually exclude surgical injury, while positive US findings indicate surgical injury in 64% of cases.

Blunt hepatic trauma: evaluation with contrast-enhanced sonography: sonographic findings and clinical application

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to report our initial experience in the assessment of liver trauma with real-time contrast-enhanced sonography (CES).

METHODS

From January 2000 to December 2003, there were 431 hemodynamically stable patients evaluated with sonography for blunt abdominal trauma. Among these patients, 87 were selected to undergo second-level imaging, consisting of CES and computed tomographic (CT) evaluation. Indications for further assessment were baseline sonographic findings positive for liver injury, baseline sonographic findings positive for injury to other abdominal parenchyma, baseline sonographic findings positive for free fluid only, baseline sonographic findings indeterminate, and baseline sonographic findings negative with persistent clinical or laboratory suspicion.

RESULTS

There were 23 hepatic lesions shown by CT in 21 patients. Peritoneal or retroperitoneal fluid was identified in 19 of 21 positive cases by all 3 imaging modalities. Liver injury was found in 15 patients on sonography and in 19 on CES. Contrast-enhanced sonography compared better than unenhanced sonography with the criterion standard for related injury conspicuity, injury size, completeness of injury extension, and involvement of the liver capsule. Both CES and CT showed intrahepatic contrast material pooling in 2 cases. All patients with false-negative sonographic or CES findings recovered uneventfully.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrast-enhanced sonography is an effective tool in the evaluation of blunt hepatic trauma, being more sensitive than baseline sonography and correlating better than baseline sonography with CT findings. In institutions where sonography is regarded as the initial procedure to screen patients with trauma, this technique may increase its effectiveness. In addition, CES may be valuable in the follow-up of patients with conservatively treated liver trauma.

Reevaluation of ultrasonography for solid-organ injury in blunt abdominal trauma

OBJECTIVE

To reevaluate the usefulness of ultrasonography for detecting and classifying solid-organ injuries from blunt abdominal trauma by comparing ultrasonography with computed tomography (CT) and laparotomy.

METHODS

Six hundred four patients with blunt abdominal trauma were examined by both B-mode ultrasonography and CT for a study period of 14 years. The ultrasonographic examiners were divided into 2 groups depending on their experience with ultrasonography. The ultrasonographic results were then compared with CT and surgical findings. This was a retrospective study.

RESULTS

In 198 patients, solid-organ injuries were identified on CT, laparotomy, or both. Sensitivity values in group A (experts) were 87.5% for hepatic injuries, 85.4% for splenic injuries, 77.6% for renal injuries, and 44.4% for pancreatic injuries. Sensitivity values in group B were 46.2% for hepatic injuries, 50.0% for splenic injuries, and 44.1% for renal injuries. The detection rates in group A were 80% to 100% for different types of hepatic injuries except superficial injuries (20%) and 70% to 100% for different types of splenic injuries. The detection rates for renal parenchymal and pancreatic duct injuries were 53.3% and 80%, respectively. The detection rates for injuries requiring intervention were 86.1% in group A and 66.7% in group B.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of ultrasonography with the use of CT and surgical findings as reference standards decreased compared with our prior study. However, ultrasonography was found to enable experienced examiners to detect and classify parenchymal injuries efficiently, despite disadvantages in detecting superficial and vascular injuries. Ultrasonography should be used to explore not only free fluid but also solid-organ injuries.

Performance of abdominal ultrasonography in blunt trauma patients with out-of-hospital or emergency department hypotension

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We determine the test performance of abdominal ultrasonography for detecting hemoperitoneum in blunt trauma patients with out-of-hospital or emergency department (ED) hypotension.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of all blunt trauma patients hospitalized at a Level I trauma center. Patients were included if they were older than 6 years and had out-of-hospital or ED hypotension (systolic blood pressure < or =90 mm Hg) and underwent ED ultrasonography. The initial interpretation of the abdominal ultrasonography was recorded, including the presence or absence of intraperitoneal fluid and the specific location of such fluid. Presence or absence of intra-abdominal injury was determined by abdominal computed tomography scan, laparotomy, or clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-seven patients with a mean age of 36.0+/-17.5 years were enrolled. One hundred forty-eight (33%) patients had intra-abdominal injuries, and 116 (78%) of these patients had hemoperitoneum. Abdominal ultrasonography had the following test performance for detecting patients with intra-abdominal injury and hemoperitoneum: sensitivity 92/116 (79%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 71% to 86%), specificity 316/331 (95%; 95% CI 93% to 97%), positive predictive value 92/107 (86%; 95% CI 78% to 92%), and negative predictive value 316/340 (93%; 95% CI 90% to 95%). The positive likelihood ratio was 15.8, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.22. One hundred five (91%) of the 116 patients with intra-abdominal injuries and hemoperitoneum underwent a therapeutic laparotomy. Abdominal ultrasonography demonstrated intraperitoneal fluid in 87 (sensitivity 83%; 95% CI 74% to 90%) of these 105 patients.

CONCLUSION

Of patients with out-of-hospital or ED hypotension, abdominal ultrasonography identifies most patients with hemoperitoneum and intra-abdominal injuries. Hypotensive patients with negative abdominal ultrasonography results, however, must be further evaluated for sources of their hypotension, including additional abdominal evaluation, once they are hemodynamically stabilized.

The use of sonography versus computed tomography in the triage of blunt abdominal trauma: the European perspective

The management of the trauma-emergency patient has become an important political and economic issue and one of the major challenges of the industrialized countries. In Europe ultrasonography is always part of the basic work-up, following physical examination, whereas computed tomography (CT) remains a second-line investigation. Injury prevalence, radiation dose exposure, practicability, and costs are relevant considerations in our emergency departments, where we have a growing number of patients seeking medical attention. The radiologist's task is to decide which imaging modality is most appropriate after the clinical context has been taken into consideration. The clinical value of CT is unquestioned; what is questionable is only its systematic use. With the growing demand for trauma care, screening ultrasonography can lower the number of inappropriate CT examinations.

Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Clinical Value of Negative Screening US Scans

PURPOSE

To assess clinical and surgical outcomes in patients with blunt abdominal trauma and negative screening ultrasonographic (US) scans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From a database of 4,000 patients who underwent screening US for suspected blunt abdominal trauma at a level 1 trauma center, the authors retrospectively identified 3,679 patients with negative US findings. In these patients, outcome was determined by means of retrospective review of the trauma registry and all radiologic, surgical, and autopsy reports. In patients with false-negative findings at screening US, all imaging studies and medical charts were also reviewed. Proportions were statistically compared by means of the Pearson chi(2) and Fisher exact tests. Monte Carlo estimation was applied when expected frequencies were low.

RESULTS

Among the 3,679 patients with negative findings at screening US, 99.9% (n = 3,641) had no injuries (true-negative findings). Differences in true-negative rates as a function of year (P >.5) or time of day (P >.3) were not significant. Among the 3,641 patients with true-negative findings, 93.6% (n = 3,407) required no additional tests and 6.4% (n = 234) underwent computed tomography or other tests. The percentage of patients who underwent additional tests was significantly higher in the 1st year of the study (19.2%) than in subsequent years (all comparisons, P <.001). Thirty-eight patients had false-negative US findings for abdominal injury. The injuries that were missed in 24 patients were nonsurgical (those that were treated successfully without intervention or were considered minor at autopsy) and those in 14 patients were surgical (required surgical intervention). Cumulatively, 65 injuries were missed. The six most common injuries included retroperitoneal hematoma (n = 13) and injuries in the spleen (n = 10), liver (n = 9), kidney (n = 8), adrenal gland (n = 8), and small bowel (n = 7). Twenty-five of the 38 patients had no or trace hemoperitoneum. Mean diagnostic delay until recognition of missed injury was 16.8 hours +/- 4.3 (standard error of the mean). The missed injury was identified within 12 hours in 19 of the 38 patients and within 24 hours in 34.

CONCLUSION

The combination of negative US findings and negative clinical observation virtually excludes abdominal injury in patients who are admitted and observed for at least 12-24 hours.

Experience with focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) in 313 pediatric patients

PURPOSE

The use of focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST), which detects free fluid in the abdomen and pelvis, for the assessment of blunt abdominal trauma is gaining acceptance worldwide and has been described extensively in the general medical literature. The precise application of this technique in pediatric patients, however, has yet to be established. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of FAST in pediatric trauma patients by comparing the results of this technique with those of CT and explorative laparotomy (ELAP).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and sonographic examinations of pediatric patients who had sustained multiple traumatic injuries for which they were treated at our hospital during a 20-month period. For all patients, FAST had been the initial screening examination for blunt abdominal trauma. We compared the FAST findings, which had been recorded as positive or negative, with the findings on CT or ELAP, which were considered definitive.

RESULTS

A total of 313 patients (204 boys and 109 girls) with a mean age of 7.1 years were included in the study. The FAST finding had been negative in 274 patients, of whom 201 had had no clinical signs of abdominal injury and had been managed conservatively without complications. CT had been performed in 109 patients and ELAP in 11. FAST had yielded 3 false-negative and 2 false-positive results. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FAST were 92.5%, 97.2%, and 95.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

FAST is an effective tool in screening pediatric trauma patients for blunt abdominal trauma.

Screening US for Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Objective Predictors of False-Negative Findings and Missed Injuries

PURPOSE

To determine the risk for missed injury in patients with blunt abdominal trauma and negative findings at screening ultrasonography (US) and with coexistent hematuria or fracture of the sixth through 12th ribs, lumbar spine, or pelvis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From a database of 4,000 patients screened with US for blunt abdominal trauma at a level 1 trauma center, the 3,679 patients with negative US findings were retrospectively classified by consensus of two authors into high-risk (n = 494) and low-risk (n = 3,185) groups based on the presence of hypothetical predictors of missed injury: hematuria (n = 96) or fracture of the sixth through 12th ribs (n = 216), lumbar spine (n = 105), or pelvis (n = 174). Outcome in each patient was determined by the same two authors consensually after retrospective review of the trauma registry and all radiologic, surgical, and autopsy reports. The risk for missed abdominal injury was determined for each patient risk group and for each hypothetical predictor. Risks were statistically compared by using the Pearson chi2, Fisher exact, or Fisher-Freeman-Halton exact test, depending on expected frequencies.

RESULTS

High-risk patients were 24 times more likely to have abdominal injuries after negative US findings (30 [6.1%] of 494) than were low-risk patients (eight [0.25%] of 3,185) (P <.001). Among high-risk patients, the absolute risks for missed abdominal injury associated with specific predictors were 15.6% (15 of 96 patients) for hematuria, 6.0% (13 of 216) for lower rib fractures, 7.6% (eight of 105) for lumbar spine fractures, and 5.2% (nine of 174) for pelvic fractures. Each of these risks was significantly higher for patients in the high-risk group than for those in the low-risk group (P <.001).

CONCLUSION

Hematuria and fracture of the lower ribs, lumbar spine, or pelvis are objective predictors of missed abdominal injury in patients with blunt abdominal trauma and negative US findings, and such patients may benefit from additional screening with computed tomography.

Imaging of renal trauma

Trauma is a major cause of death and disability and renal injuries occur in up to 10% of patients with significant blunt abdominal trauma. Patients with penetrating trauma and hematuria, blunt trauma with shock and hematuria, or gross hematuria warrant imaging of the urinary tract specifically and CT is the preferred modality. If there is significant perinephric fluid, especially medially, or deep laceration, delayed images should be obtained to evaluate for urinary extravasation. Most renal injuries are minor, including contusions, subcapsular and perinephric hematoma, and superficial lacerations. More significant injuries include deep lacerations, shattered kidney, active hemorrhage, infarctions, and vascular pedicle and UPJ injuries. These injuries are more likely to need surgery or have delayed complications but may still often be managed conservatively. The presence of urinary extravasation and large devitalized areas of renal parenchyma, especially with associated injuries of intraperitoneal organs, is particularly prone to complication and usually requires surgery. Active hemorrhage should be recognized because it often indicates a need for urgent surgery or embolization to prevent exsanguination.

Spontaneous rupture of the spleen: ultrasound patterns, diagnosis and follow-up

Spontaneous rupture of the spleen is an extremely rare complication usually of infectious diseases or disorders of the haematopoietic system and has been described mostly in case reports. The incidence, symptoms, causes, therapy, and prognosis are poorly defined. From July 1985 to January 2000 41 patients with spontaneous splenic rupture were diagnosed by abdominal ultrasound and confirmed by splenectomy (n=12), CT (n=15), and ultrasound follow up (n=26). An ultrasound grading system was retrospectively established based on the degree of splenic injury (grade 0-2=low grade injury, grade 3=high grade injury) and correlated with surgical procedures. 30 day mortality rate was studied in relation to underlying disorders, ultrasound grades and treatment decisions. 21 patients had underlying malignant disorders (group I) and 20 patients had benign diseases (group II). Between group I and II we observed a highly significant difference in 30 day mortality rates (n=7; 38.1% vs n=1; 5%, p<0.01), but no significant difference in high grade injury rate (n=3; 14.3% vs n=2; 10.0%; p=ns) and surgical treatment rate (n=5; 23.8% vs n=7; 35.0%; p=ns). Depending on ultrasound grades the surgical procedures were 0% for grade 0, 16.7% for grade 1, 30.4% for grade 2, and 60% for grade 3. There were no significant differences between patients, who died within the first 30 days (n=9) and those who survived more than 30 days (n=32) regarding high grade splenic injury rate (n=0; 0% vs n=5; 15.6%; p=ns), and surgical treatment rate (n=2; 22.2% vs n=10; 31.2%; p=ns). Spontaneous rupture of the spleen is an extremely rare event. It is associated with a high mortality rate within 30 days in patients with malignant disease. Sonomorphologic grading is helpful for treatment decisions. 30 day mortality rate is correlated with neither ultrasound grades, nor surgical treatment rates.

Tratamento não-operatório e operatório de lesões esplênicas em crianças

OBJETIVO: Comparar dois grupos de pacientes pediátricos com lesões esplênicas sendo um tratado conservadoramente e outro com cirurgia. MÉTODO: Foram avaliadas prospectivamente 32 crianças com lesões esplênicas. Os pacientes foram divididos em dois grupos, Grupo I (tratamento não-operatório, n=16) e Grupo II (tratamento operatório, n=16). O critério para inclusão no tratamento não-operatório foi estabilidade hemodinâmica, escala de coma de Glasgow maior que 12, ausência de lesões associadas de vísceras ôcas. Na avaliação clínica foram verificadas a necessidade de hemotransfusão e de tratamento em Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI). As complicações, tempo de permanência hospitalar,o índice de trauma (RTS, ISS e TRISS) foram analisados. Os exames complementares por imagem foram a ultra-sonografia abdominal seguida de tomografia computadorizada. RESULTADOS: As lesões grau II e III predominaram no Grupo I enquanto as de grau IV e V no Grupo II. As lesões associadas mais freqüentes foram o TCE seguido pelo trauma de extremidades. Com os critérios adotados se obteve total sucesso no tratamento não operatório. CONCLUSÕES: O tratamento não-operatório é uma opção segura para o trauma abdominal fechado com lesão esplênica, desde que seja indicado mediante critérios técnicos explicitados. O tratamento não-operatório da lesão esplênica só pode ser feito em serviços que estejam adequadamente equipados com recursos materiais ( ultra-sonografia e tomografia computadorizada) e com equipe cirúrgica em tempo integral para avaliação continuada dos pacientes.

Blunt liver injuries in polytrauma: results from a cohort study with the regular use of whole-body helical computed tomography

The estimated prevalence of liver injury in patients with blunt multiple trauma ranges from 1% to 8%. The objective of this study was to investigate the profile of accompanying liver injury in a cohort of polytraumatized patients who had regularly undergone contrast-enhanced, whole-body helical computed tomography (CT). We enrolled consecutive patients admitted between September 1997 and January 2001 to a level I trauma center. Clinical baseline data were compiled as part of a nationwide trauma registry. Morphologic features were evaluated descriptively, whereas prognostic variables were assessed by logistic regression analysis. We identified 218 patients [149 men, mean age 35 +/- 18 years, mean injury severity score (ISS) 35 +/- 10], 55 of whom had sustained blunt liver trauma [25.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.6-31.5%]. The prevalence of Moore III to V lesions was 10.1%. There were 99 parenchymal contusions, 15 capsular tears, and 2 liver fractures. Surgery was required in 15 patients and was best predicted by the classification of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma [odds ratio (OR) 3.91, 95% CI 1.59-9.61]. The mortality rate was 0.0035/person/day. Patients requiring surgical repair had fourfold increased relative odds of case fatality (OR 4.50, 95% CI 1.01-19.96). Sevenfold increased relative odds were observed if liver laceration was considered the leading injury (OR 7.17, 95% CI 1.17-43.97). The prevalence of liver lacerations among multiple-trauma patients is likely to be underestimated and must be determined by the independent application of reference standards, such as helical CT. High-grade hepatic injuries and the need for surgical repair are associated with poorer survival prognosis.

Splenic trauma: evaluation with contrast-specific sonography and a second-generation contrast medium: preliminary experience

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience in the assessment of splenic trauma with contrast-coded sonography and a second-generation contrast medium.

METHODS

From January to May 2002, 120 patients were studied with sonography for suspected splenic trauma. Twenty-five were selected for further imaging because of sonographic findings positive for splenic injury, findings positive for peritoneal fluid only, indeterminate findings, and negative findings with high clinical or laboratory suspicion. These patients underwent contrast-enhanced harmonic sonography and contrast-enhanced helical computed tomography.

RESULTS

Among the 25 patients studied, 6 had no spleen trauma at initial and follow-up evaluation. One patient had a hypoperfused spleen without parenchymal damage, and 18 had splenic injuries; these 19 patients were considered positive. Hemoperitoneum was identified by sonography, contrast-enhanced sonography, and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in 74% of the 19 positive cases. Perisplenic clots were recognized in 58% of the cases by computed tomography and in 42% by baseline and enhanced sonography. Splenic infarctions were found in 11% of cases by contrast-enhanced sonography and computed tomography; none was found by unenhanced sonography. Parenchymal traumatic lesions were identified in 12 of 18 patients with splenic injuries by unenhanced sonography, in 17 cases by contrast-enhanced sonography, and in all 18 cases by contrast-enhanced computed tomography. A minimal splenic lesion was found in the single patient with a false-negative contrast-enhanced sonographic finding. Contrast-enhanced sonography correlated appreciably better than unenhanced sonography in detecting injuries and in estimating their extent. Findings undetectable on unenhanced sonography were also noted: splenic hypoperfusion in 11% of positive cases on both contrast-enhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced computed tomography, contrast medium pooling in 21% of cases on both contrast-enhanced sonography and computed tomography, and contrast extravasation in 11% of cases on computed tomography and 5% on contrast-enhanced sonography.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrast-enhanced sonography is a promising tool in the assessment of splenic trauma. In institutions where sonography is used as the initial procedure, this technique may increase its effectiveness.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of emergency ultrasonography for blunt abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

How precise and reliable is ultrasonography as a primary tool for injury assessment in blunt abdominal trauma?

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted of prospective clinical trials of ultrasonography for blunt abdominal trauma. Publications were retrieved by structured searching among databases, review articles and major text books. Authors and experts in the field were contacted for original and unpublished data. For statistical analysis, summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROCs) were computed using weighted and robust regression models, with Q* denoting the shoulder of the curve. Post-test probabilities were calculated as a function of pooled likelihood ratios (LRs).

RESULTS

Thirty of 123 trials enrolling 9047 patients were eligible for final analysis. With respect to targeting organ lesions, ultrasonography showed a summary Q* value of 0.91 (inverse variance weights, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.76-1.07); negative predictive values ranged from 0.72 to 0.99. A similar SROC slope was calculated for screening for free fluid (Q* = 0.89 (95 per cent c.i. 0.73-1.05)). Ultrasonography detects the presence of organ lesions, but fails to exclude abdominal injuries (random effects negative LR 0.23 (95 per cent c.i. 0.18-0.28)). Given a pretest probability of 50 per cent for blunt abdominal injury, a post-test probability of nearly 25 per cent remains in the case of a negative sonogram.

CONCLUSION

Despite its high specificity, ultrasonography has an unexpectedly low sensitivity for the detection of both free fluid and organ lesions. In clinically suspected abdominal trauma, another assessment (e.g. helical computed tomography) must be performed regardless of the initial ultrasonographic findings.