Optimizing trauma multidetector CT protocol for blunt splenic injury: need for arterial and portal venous phase scans.

PURPOSE To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of arterial, portal venous, and dual-phase computed tomography (CT) for blunt traumatic splenic injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS Informed consent was waived for this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant study. Retrospective record review identified 120 blunt trauma patients (87 male [72.5%] 33 female [27.5%]; age range, 18-94 years) who had undergone dual-phase abdominal CT within 5 years, including 30 without splenic injury, 30 with parenchymal injury only, 30 with splenic active bleeding, and 30 with intrasplenic pseudoaneurysm. Six radiologists each performed blinded review of 20 different cases, and scored the presence of pseudoaneurysm, active bleeding, parenchymal injury, and hematoma; 20 cases were interpreted by all radiologists. Data analysis included calculation of diagnostic performance measures with confidence intervals, areas under receiver operating characteristic curves, and interobserver agreement/variability. RESULTS For intrasplenic pseudoaneurysm, arterial phase imaging was more sensitive (70% [21 of 30] vs 17% [five of 30]; P < .0002) and more accurate (87% [78 of 90] vs 72% [65 of 90]; P = .0165) than portal venous phase imaging. For active bleeding, arterial phase imaging was less sensitive (70% [21 of 30] vs 93% [28 of 30]; P = .0195) and less accurate (89% [80 of 90] vs 98% [88 of 90]; P = .0168) than portal venous phase imaging. For parenchymal injury, arterial phase CT was less sensitive (76% [68 of 90] vs 93% [84 of 90]; P = .001) and less accurate (81% [nine of 120] vs 95% [114 of 120]; P = .0008) than portal venous phase CT. For all injuries, dual-phase review was equivalent to or better than single-phase review. CONCLUSION For CT evaluation of blunt splenic injury, arterial phase is superior to portal venous phase imaging for pseudoaneurysm but inferior for active bleeding and parenchymal disruption; dual-phase CT provides optimal overall performance.

[1]  T. Scalea,et al.  Experience with splenic main coil embolization and significance of new or persistent pseudoaneurym: reembolize, operate, or observe. , 2007, The Journal of trauma.

[2]  T. Scalea,et al.  Nonoperative salvage of computed tomography-diagnosed splenic injuries: utilization of angiography for triage and embolization for hemostasis. , 1995, The Journal of trauma.

[3]  K. Shanmuganathan,et al.  Value of contrast-enhanced CT in detecting active hemorrhage in patients with blunt abdominal or pelvic trauma. , 1993, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  A. Peitzman,et al.  Blunt splenic injury in adults: clinical and CT criteria for management, with emphasis on active extravasation. , 1998, Radiology.

[5]  G. Velmahos,et al.  Nonoperative management of splenic injuries: have we gone too far? , 2000, Archives of surgery.

[6]  K. Davis,et al.  Failures of splenic nonoperative management: is the glass half empty or half full? , 2001, The Journal of trauma.

[7]  J. Soto,et al.  Blunt splenic trauma: delayed-phase CT for differentiation of active hemorrhage from contained vascular injury in patients. , 2007, Radiology.

[8]  H. Richard,et al.  Correlation of multidetector CT findings with splenic arteriography and surgery: prospective study in 392 patients. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[9]  Yu-Chun Wang,et al.  Evaluation of Need for Operative Intervention in Blunt Splenic Injury: Intraperitoneal Contrast Extravasation has an Increased Probability of Requiring Operative Intervention , 2010, World Journal of Surgery.

[10]  T. Scalea,et al.  Admission angiography for blunt splenic injury: advantages and pitfalls. , 2001, The Journal of trauma.

[11]  J. Soto,et al.  Blunt abdominal trauma: utility of 5-minute delayed CT with a reduced radiation dose. , 2006, Radiology.

[12]  G. Mcgwin,et al.  Computed tomography identification of latent pseudoaneurysm after blunt splenic injury: pathology or technology? , 2010, The Journal of trauma.

[13]  K. Davis,et al.  Improved success in nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries: embolization of splenic artery pseudoaneurysms. , 1997, The Journal of trauma.

[14]  R. Benjamin,et al.  An Evidence-Based Approach to Spleen Trauma: Management and Outcomes , 2009 .

[15]  R. Newcombe.  Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[16]  E. B. Wilson.  Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical Inference , 1927 .

[17]  A. Cohen,et al.  Multidetector CT evaluation of active extravasation in blunt abdominal and pelvic trauma patients. , 2008, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[18]  T. Scalea,et al.  Nonsurgical management of blunt splenic injury: use of CT criteria to select patients for splenic arteriography and potential endovascular therapy. , 2000, Radiology.

[19]  J. Soto,et al.  CT of blunt abdominal and pelvic vascular injury , 2009, Emergency Radiology.

[20]  T. Fabian,et al.  Predicting clinical outcome of nonsurgical management of blunt splenic injury: using CT to reveal abnormalities of splenic vasculature. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[21]  T. Scalea,et al.  Blunt splenic injuries: nonsurgical treatment with CT, arteriography, and transcatheter arterial embolization of the splenic artery. , 1991, Radiology.

[22]  T. Fabian,et al.  A survey of American Association for the Surgery of Trauma member practices in the management of blunt splenic injury. , 2011, The Journal of trauma.