Literature DB >> 18404054

Computed tomography alone for cervical spine clearance in the unreliable patient--are we there yet?

Jay Menaker1, Allan Philp, Sharon Boswell, Thomas M Scalea.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Injuries to the cervical spine (CS) occur in 2% to 6.6% of blunt trauma patients. Studies have suggested that computed tomography (CT) alone is sufficient for CS clearance in unreliable patients based on follow-up magnetic resonance (MR) imaging not altering management. We hypothesized that an admission cervical spine CT with no acute injury-using new CT technology-is not sufficient for CS clearance in an unreliable patient.
METHODS: The trauma registry was used to identify all patients with blunt trauma who had CS imaging with a CT and MR between August 2004 and December 2005. During this time period, a clinical guideline was in place whereby patients who had persistently unreliable examinations had MR despite a normal admission CT. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score at time of MR, and injury specific data.
RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty-four patients in total were identified. Two hundred three patients without obvious neurologic deficits but unreliable clinical examination, defined by a GCS score of </=14, had an initial cervical spine CT read by an attending trauma radiologist as having no acute injury. Mean age was 42.3 years (+/-20.4 years) and mean Injury Severity Score was 29.1 (+/-11.8). There were 135 (66.5%) men. Mechanism of injury included motor vehicle or motorcycle collision (48.8%), falls (25.4%), pedestrians struck (10.2%), assault (7.8%), and other (7.8%). One hundred eighty-four (90.6%) patients had a negative MR and collars were subsequently removed. After collar removal, no patient developed new neurologic deficit. Eighteen (8.9%) patients had an abnormal MR, 2 of which required operative repair and 14 required extended cervical collar use. Two patients had collars removed at the discretion of the attending surgeon. One patient had a suboptimal MR and was discharged in a collar with scheduled follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Newer generation CT continues to miss CS injuries in unreliable patients. MR changed the management in 7.9% of patients having had an admission CT with no acute injury. Thus, we recommend continued use of MR for CS clearance in the unreliable patient and ongoing evaluation as the quality of CT imaging continues to evolve.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18404054     DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181674675

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma        ISSN: 0022-5282


  17 in total

Review 1.  Clinical review: Spinal imaging for the adult obtunded blunt trauma patient: update from 2004.

Authors:  James O M Plumb; C G Morris
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Cervical spinal clearance: A prospective Western Trauma Association Multi-institutional Trial.

Authors:  Kenji Inaba; Saskya Byerly; Lisa D Bush; Matthew J Martin; David T Martin; Kimberly A Peck; Galinos Barmparas; Matthew J Bradley; Joshua P Hazelton; Raul Coimbra; Asad J Choudhry; Carlos V R Brown; Chad G Ball; Jill R Cherry-Bukowiec; Clay Cothren Burlew; Bellal Joseph; Julie Dunn; Christian T Minshall; Matthew M Carrick; Gina M Berg; Demetrios Demetriades
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.313

Review 3.  Utility of MRI for cervical spine clearance after blunt traumatic injury: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ajay Malhotra; Xiao Wu; Vivek B Kalra; Holly K Grossetta Nardini; Renu Liu; Khalid M Abbed; Howard P Forman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Cervical spine collar clearance in the obtunded adult blunt trauma patient: a systematic review and practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Authors:  Mayur B Patel; Stephen S Humble; Daniel C Cullinane; Matthew A Day; Randeep S Jawa; Clinton J Devin; Margaret S Delozier; Lou M Smith; Miya A Smith; Jeannette M Capella; Andrea M Long; Joseph S Cheng; Taylor C Leath; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Elliott R Haut; John J Como
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.313

5.  Spinal cord injury resulting from injury missed on CT scan: the danger of relying on CT alone for collar removal.

Authors:  Gregory Gebauer; Meredith Osterman; James Harrop; Alexander Vaccaro
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The pediatric cervical spine instability study. A pilot study assessing the prognostic value of four imaging modalities in clearing the cervical spine for children with severe traumatic injuries.

Authors:  Douglas L Brockmeyer; Brian T Ragel; John R W Kestle
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.475

7.  The utility of whole spine survey MRI in blunt trauma patients sustaining single level or contiguous spinal fractures.

Authors:  Kofi-Buaku Atsina; Aleksandr Rozenberg; Santosh Kumar Selvarajan
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2019-05-15

8.  Are "normal" multidetector computed tomographic scans sufficient to allow collar removal in the trauma patient?

Authors:  Josef B Simon; Andrew J Schoenfeld; Jeffrey N Katz; Atul F Kamath; Atul Kamath; Atul Kamuth; Kirkham Wood; Christopher M Bono; Mitchel B Harris
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2010-01

9.  Additional Imaging in Alert Trauma Patients with Cervical Spine Tenderness and a Negative Computed Tomographic Scan: Is it Needed?

Authors:  Michael N Mavros; Haytham M A Kaafarani; Ali Y Mejaddam; Elie P Ramly; Laura Avery; Peter J Fagenholz; D Dante Yeh; Marc A de Moya; George C Velmahos
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in addition to computed tomography scans in the evaluation of cervical spine injuries: a study of obtunded blunt trauma patients.

Authors:  Bernard Puang Huh Lau; Hwee Weng Dennis Hey; Eugene Tze-Chun Lau; Pei Yi Nee; Kimberly-Anne Tan; Wah Tze Tan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.