Use of CT Vs. MRI for Diagnosis of Hip or Pelvic Fractures in Elderly Patients After Low Energy Trauma.

Background Elderly patients who fall account for more than two million emergency department visits each year. In 4-10 % of these patients, initial plain radiographs do not identify a hip or pelvis fracture later diagnosed with advanced imaging. No consensus exists about what type of imaging, CT or MRI, should be obtained in elderly patients with hip or pelvic pain after a low energy trauma. The purpose of this study was to determine whether CT or MRI is more likely to result in a definitive fracture diagnosis in elderly patients with hip or pelvic pain after low energy trauma. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted of all patients who presented to the ED at a single level one trauma center over a 4.5 year period. Inclusion criteria were age greater than fifty years old, presentation with hip and/ or pelvis pain due to a low energy trauma, and radiographic imaging including both plain radiographs and at least one pelvis MRI or CT. Results Of the 218 patients who met inclusion criteria and had negative initial plain radiographs, CT or MRI later diagnosed a fracture in 69 patients (32%). Seventy eight patients underwent MRI (24 fractures, 32%), 132 underwent CT imaging (41 fractures, 31%), and eight had both CT and MRI (5 fractures, 63%). Patients who underwent CT spent less time in the ED on average (430 minutes) than those who underwent MRI, or MRI and CT (502 minutes and 620 minutes respectively). Patients who underwent CT were just as likely to be diagnosed with a fracture as those who underwent MRI (p= 0.002). We encountered no cases where CT imaging did not identify a fracture that was later identified on MRI. Fifty six patients (26%) had at least one contraindication to MRI. Conclusions Our study suggests CT may be adequate to rule out hip and pelvic fractures in this patient population. CT may be preferable to MRI based on decreased time spent in the ED and the large percentage of elderly patients with contraindications to MRI.Level of Evidence: III.

[1]  S. Overgaard,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of CT- and MRI-scanning in evaluation of occult fracture of the proximal femur. , 2015, Injury.

[2]  S. Heikal,et al.  The use of computed tomography in identifying radiologically occult hip fractures in the elderly. , 2014, Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

[3]  J. Smith,et al.  Investigation of Occult Hip Fractures: The Use of CT and MRI , 2013, TheScientificWorldJournal.

[4]  G. Hendey,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging identifies occult hip fractures missed by 64-slice computed tomography. , 2012, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[5]  Mats Geijer,et al.  Observer variation for radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging of occult hip fractures , 2011, Acta radiologica.

[6]  D. Ring,et al.  Comparison of CT and MRI for diagnosis of suspected scaphoid fractures. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  J. Turner,et al.  The use of MRI to detect occult fractures of the proximal femur: a study of 102 consecutive cases over a ten-year period. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  Ying Lu,et al.  MRI and CT of insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and the proximal femur. , 2008, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  M. Liebergall,et al.  Early diagnosis of occult hip fractures MRI versus CT scan. , 2005, Injury.

[10]  Patrick T. Liu,et al.  Prevalence of traumatic hip and pelvic fractures in patients with suspected hip fracture and negative initial standard radiographs--a study of emergency department patients. , 2005, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[11]  R. Staron,et al.  MRI of seemingly isolated greater trochanteric fractures. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  H. Thomsen,et al.  The advantages of MRI in the detection of occult hip fractures , 2004, European Radiology.