Literature DB >> 12324828

The use of forced flexion/extension views in the obtunded trauma patient.

Harry J Griffiths1, Jason Wagner, Jeff Anglen, Paul Bunn, Michael Metzler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether forced flexion/extension (F/E) films for "clearing" the cervical spine in unconscious or semiconscious patients are useful or actually dangerous. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Of 810 patients admitted for blunt trauma over a 5-year period, 479 patients whose films and charts were available received passive F/E film views of the cervical spine. Of these, 447 were reviewed retrospectively in masked fashion for any exacerbation of neurological changes subsequent to the procedure and with respect to the final neurological status at discharge.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (6%) had various abnormalities including fractures and ligamentous injuries seen on the initial films. Following forced F/E films no change was made in the diagnosis of 23 patients. Of the remaining six patients, two required no treatment, two only required the use of a collar but two did have surgical intervention, this decision being based on the findings seen in the initial films. However, 285 films (59%) were judged inadequate due either to inadequate F/E (150 patients, 31%) or poor visualization (194 patients, 40%). There were three false positives all subsequently cleared by other studies and there were no false negatives. From the chart review, there were no complications or deaths attributable to the procedure.
CONCLUSION: Although we were unable to find any complication or deaths directly attributable to the procedure, the clinicians abandoned passive F/E views in obtunded patients on the grounds of expense. Our present method of "clearing" a cervical spine in an obtunded patient is a cross-table lateral radiograph followed by a high-resolution thin-slice CT scan with sagittal and coronal reconstruction. We are against the use of routine MRI studies and of a forced F/E view in these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12324828     DOI: 10.1007/s00256-002-0545-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Skeletal Radiol        ISSN: 0364-2348            Impact factor:   2.199


  7 in total

Review 1.  Controversies in cervical spine imaging in trauma patients.

Authors:  Richard H Daffner
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2004-06-25

2.  [Evidence based diagnostic procedures for the determination of suspected blunt cervical spine injuries. Development of an algorithm].

Authors:  B A Leidel; K-G Kanz; W Mutschler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Can multi-positional magnetic resonance imaging be used to evaluate angular parameters in cervical spine? A comparison of multi-positional MRI to dynamic plain radiograph.

Authors:  Permsak Paholpak; Koji Tamai; Kyle Shoell; Kittipong Sessumpun; Zorica Buser; Jeffrey C Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Imaging investigations in Spine Trauma: The value of commonly used imaging modalities and emerging imaging modalities.

Authors:  Bernhard J Tins
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-06-13

Review 5.  Risks associated with magnetic resonance imaging and cervical collar in comatose, blunt trauma patients with negative comprehensive cervical spine computed tomography and no apparent spinal deficit.

Authors:  C Michael Dunham; Brian P Brocker; B David Collier; David J Gemmel
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2008-07-14       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  Are upright lateral cervical radiographs in the obtunded trauma patient useful? A retrospective study.

Authors:  Craig H Rabb; Jeffrey L Johnson; David VanSickle; Kathryn Beauchamp; Gene Bolles; Ernest E Moore
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2007-02-08       Impact factor: 5.469

7.  Appropriate CT cervical spine utilisation in the emergency department.

Authors:  Mark Baker; Cassie Jaeger; Carol Hafley; James Waymack
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2020-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.