Whole body imaging in blunt multisystem trauma patients without obvious signs of injury: results of a prospective study.

HYPOTHESIS The use of liberal whole body imaging (pan scan) in patients based on mechanism is warranted, even in evaluable patients with no obvious signs of chest or abdominal injury. DESIGN Prospective observational study. SETTING Academic level I trauma center. PATIENTS All patients admitted following blunt multisystem trauma. INTERVENTION Pan scan, including computed tomography (CT) of the head, cervical spine, chest, abdomen, and pelvis, with the following inclusion criteria: (1) no visible evidence of chest or abdominal injury, (2) hemodynamically stable, (3) normal abdominal examination results in a neurologically intact patient or unevaluable abdominal examination results secondary to a depressed level of consciousness, and (4) significant mechanisms of injury. Radiological findings and changes in treatment based on these findings were recorded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Any alteration in the normal treatment plan as a direct result of CT scan findings. These alterations include early hospital discharge, admission for observation, operative intervention, and additional diagnostic studies or interventions. RESULTS One thousand patients underwent pan scan during the 18-month observation period, of which 592 were evaluable patients with no obvious signs of abdominal injury. Clinically significant abnormalities were found in 3.5% of head CT scans, 5.1% of cervical spine CT scans, 19.6% of chest CT scans, and 7.1% of abdominal CT scans. Overall treatment was changed in 18.9% of patients based on abnormal CT scan findings. CONCLUSIONS The use of pan scan based on mechanism in awake, evaluable patients is warranted. Clinically significant abnormalities are not uncommon, resulting in a change in treatment in nearly 19% of patients.

[1]  P. Vock,et al.  Evaluation of a 16-MDCT scanner in an emergency department: initial clinical experience and workflow analysis. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  M. Sise,et al.  Spiral computed tomography for the diagnosis of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine fractures: its time has come. , 2005, The Journal of trauma.

[3]  J. Soto,et al.  Use of 3D imaging in CT of the acute trauma patient: impact of a PACS-based software package , 2005, Emergency Radiology.

[4]  P. Poletti,et al.  Blunt abdominal trauma patients: can organ injury be excluded without performing computed tomography? , 2004, The Journal of trauma.

[5]  David J Brenner,et al.  Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. , 2004, Radiology.

[6]  Mannudeep K. Kalra,et al.  Radiation exposure from Chest CT: Issues and Strategies , 2004, Journal of Korean medical science.

[7]  E. Dunn,et al.  The benefit of routine thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic computed tomography to evaluate trauma patients with closed head injuries. , 2003, American journal of surgery.

[8]  J. Tepas,et al.  Radiographic clearance of blunt cervical spine injury: plain radiograph or computed tomography scan? , 2003, The Journal of trauma.

[9]  R. Lavery,et al.  Prospective validation of computed tomographic screening of the thoracolumbar spine in trauma. , 2003, The Journal of trauma.

[10]  R. Hayward.  VOMIT (victims of modern imaging technology)—an acronym for our times , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  Samir M Fakhry,et al.  Current diagnostic approaches lack sensitivity in the diagnosis of perforated blunt small bowel injury: analysis from 275,557 trauma admissions from the EAST multi-institutional HVI trial. , 2003, The Journal of trauma.

[12]  Oscar D. Guillamondegui,et al.  Pelvic radiography in blunt trauma resuscitation: a diminishing role. , 2002, The Journal of trauma.

[13]  P. Rhee,et al.  Lumbar fractures in adult blunt trauma: axial and single-slice helical abdominal and pelvic computed tomographic scans versus portable plain films. , 2002, The Journal of trauma.

[14]  G. Victorino,et al.  Defining the role of computed tomography in blunt abdominal trauma: use in the hemodynamically stable patient with a depressed level of consciousness. , 2002, Archives of surgery.

[15]  P. Reilly,et al.  Evaluation of the lower spine after blunt trauma using abdominal computed tomographic scanning supplemented with lateral scanograms. , 2002, The Journal of trauma.

[16]  A. Exadaktylos,et al.  Do we really need routine computed tomographic scanning in the primary evaluation of blunt chest trauma in patients with "normal" chest radiograph? , 2001, The Journal of trauma.

[17]  R. Gonzalez,et al.  Emergent extra-abdominal trauma surgery: is abdominal screening necessary? , 2000, The Journal of trauma.

[18]  J. Skurnick,et al.  Emergency department discharge of patients with a negative cranial computed tomography scan after minimal head injury. , 2000, Annals of surgery.

[19]  T. Fabian,et al.  Blunt bowel and mesenteric injuries: the role of screening computed tomography. , 2000, The Journal of trauma.

[20]  S. Fakhry,et al.  Relatively short diagnostic delays (<8 hours) produce morbidity and mortality in blunt small bowel injury: an analysis of time to operative intervention in 198 patients from a multicenter experience. , 1999, The Journal of trauma.

[21]  A. V. van Vugt,et al.  Sonography in a clinical algorithm for early evaluation of 1671 patients with blunt abdominal trauma. , 1999, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[22]  G. Velmahos,et al.  Routine helical computed tomographic evaluation of the mediastinum in high-risk blunt trauma patients. , 1998, Archives of surgery.

[23]  J. Richards,et al.  Computed tomography for blunt abdominal trauma in the ED: a prospective study. , 1998, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[24]  R. Salluzzo,et al.  Injuries distracting from intraabdominal injuries after blunt trauma. , 1998, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[25]  J. Skurnick,et al.  Admission or observation is not necessary after a negative abdominal computed tomographic scan in patients with suspected blunt abdominal trauma: results of a prospective, multi-institutional trial. , 1998, The Journal of trauma.

[26]  A. V. van Vugt,et al.  The value of physical examination in the diagnosis of patients with blunt abdominal trauma: a retrospective study. , 1997, Injury.

[27]  M. Blacksin,et al.  Frequency and significance of fractures of the upper cervical spine detected by CT in patients with severe neck trauma. , 1995, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[28]  L. Jacobson,et al.  Selective use of computed tomography and diagnostic peritoneal lavage in blunt abdominal trauma. , 1995, The Journal of trauma.

[29]  P. Shrimpton,et al.  CT--an increasingly important slice of the medical exposure of patients. , 1993, The British journal of radiology.

[30]  S. Steinberg,et al.  Prospective assessment of the value of computed tomography for trauma. , 1993, The Journal of trauma.

[31]  A. Fried,et al.  Abdominal CT Scans in Patients with Blunt Trauma: Low Yield in the Absence of Clinical Findings , 1992, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[32]  P. Sahdev,et al.  Evaluation of liver function tests in screening for intra-abdominal injuries. , 1991, Annals of emergency medicine.

[33]  S. Shackford,et al.  Intra-abdominal injury following blunt trauma. Identifying the high-risk patient using objective risk factors. , 1989, Archives of surgery.

[34]  E. Fishman,et al.  The efficacy of computed tomography in evaluating abdominal injuries in children with major head trauma. , 1987, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[35]  A Rodriguez,et al.  Recognition of intra-abdominal injury in blunt trauma victims. A prospective study comparing physical examination with peritoneal lavage. , 1982, The American surgeon.

[36]  B. Bivins,et al.  Diagnostic peritoneal lavage in pediatric trauma. , 1976, The Journal of trauma.

[37]  G. Velmahos,et al.  Computed Tomography for Evaluation of Mild to Moderate Pediatric Trauma: Are We Overusing It? , 2001, World Journal of Surgery.