J-L af Geijerstam1, M Britton. 1. The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU) and the Department of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. jean-luc.af.geijerstam@medks.ki.se <jean-luc.af.geijerstam@medks.ki.se>
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To search the literature for case reports on adverse outcomes in patients with mild head injury where acute computed tomography (CT) findings had been normal. METHODS: Mild head injury was defined as head trauma involving amnesia or loss of consciousness, but where neurological findings are normal on arrival at hospital (GCS 15). The scientific literature was systematically searched for case reports where an early CT was normal and the patient deteriorated within two days. In these cases, early discharge despite a normal CT head scan would have been hazardous. RESULTS: Two prospective studies were found that investigated the safety of early CT in 3300 patients with mild head injury, as were 39 reports on adverse outcomes describing 821 patients. In addition, 52 studies containing over 62 000 patients with mild head injury were reviewed. In total, only three cases were deemed to have experienced an early adverse outcome despite a normal CT and GCS 15 on initial presentation. In another eight cases with incomplete descriptions, the interpretation was doubtful. Many reports of complications were not relevant to our question and excluded. These reports included cases with more severe head injury/not GCS 15 at presentation, complications that occurred after more than two days, or initial CT findings that were not fully normal. CONCLUSION: Very few cases were found where an early adverse event occurred after normal acute CT in patients with mild head injury. The strongest scientific evidence available at this time shows that a CT strategy is a safe way to triage patients for admission.
OBJECTIVE: To search the literature for case reports on adverse outcomes in patients with mild head injury where acute computed tomography (CT) findings had been normal. METHODS: Mild head injury was defined as head trauma involving amnesia or loss of consciousness, but where neurological findings are normal on arrival at hospital (GCS 15). The scientific literature was systematically searched for case reports where an early CT was normal and the patient deteriorated within two days. In these cases, early discharge despite a normal CT head scan would have been hazardous. RESULTS: Two prospective studies were found that investigated the safety of early CT in 3300 patients with mild head injury, as were 39 reports on adverse outcomes describing 821 patients. In addition, 52 studies containing over 62 000 patients with mild head injury were reviewed. In total, only three cases were deemed to have experienced an early adverse outcome despite a normal CT and GCS 15 on initial presentation. In another eight cases with incomplete descriptions, the interpretation was doubtful. Many reports of complications were not relevant to our question and excluded. These reports included cases with more severe head injury/not GCS 15 at presentation, complications that occurred after more than two days, or initial CT findings that were not fully normal. CONCLUSION: Very few cases were found where an early adverse event occurred after normal acute CT in patients with mild head injury. The strongest scientific evidence available at this time shows that a CT strategy is a safe way to triage patients for admission.
Authors: B Borovich; J Braun; J N Guilburd; M Zaaroor; M Michich; L Levy; A Lemberger; I Grushkiewicz; M Feinsod; I Schächter Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1985-07 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Jonathan J Ratcliff; Opeolu Adeoye; Christopher J Lindsell; Kimberly W Hart; Arthur Pancioli; Jason T McMullan; John K Yue; Daniel K Nishijima; Wayne A Gordon; Alex B Valadka; David O Okonkwo; Hester F Lingsma; Andrew I R Maas; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Kelly A Foks; Crispijn L van den Brand; Hester F Lingsma; Joukje van der Naalt; Bram Jacobs; Eline de Jong; Hugo F den Boogert; Özcan Sir; Peter Patka; Suzanne Polinder; Menno I Gaakeer; Charlotte E Schutte; Kim E Jie; Huib F Visee; Myriam G M Hunink; Eef Reijners; Meriam Braaksma; Guus G Schoonman; Ewout W Steyerberg; Korné Jellema; Diederik W J Dippel Journal: BMJ Date: 2018-08-24
Authors: Seth A Seabury; Étienne Gaudette; Dana P Goldman; Amy J Markowitz; Jordan Brooks; Michael A McCrea; David O Okonkwo; Geoffrey T Manley; Opeolu Adeoye; Neeraj Badjatia; Kim Boase; Yelena Bodien; M Ross Bullock; Randall Chesnut; John D Corrigan; Karen Crawford; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Sureyya Dikmen; Ann-Christine Duhaime; Richard Ellenbogen; V Ramana Feeser; Adam Ferguson; Brandon Foreman; Raquel Gardner; Joseph Giacino; Luis Gonzalez; Shankar Gopinath; Rao Gullapalli; J Claude Hemphill; Gillian Hotz; Sonia Jain; Frederick Korley; Joel Kramer; Natalie Kreitzer; Harvey Levin; Chris Lindsell; Joan Machamer; Christopher Madden; Alastair Martin; Thomas McAllister; Randall Merchant; Pratik Mukherjee; Lindsay Nelson; Florence Noel; Eva Palacios; Daniel Perl; Ava Puccio; Miri Rabinowitz; Claudia Robertson; Jonathan Rosand; Angelle Sander; Gabriella Satris; David Schnyer; Mark Sherer; Murray Stein; Sabrina Taylor; Nancy Temkin; Arthur Toga; Alex Valadka; Mary Vassar; Paul Vespa; Kevin Wang; John Yue; Esther Yuh; Ross Zafonte Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-05-18