Sivashanmugam Dhandapani1, Pravin Salunke, Kanchan K Mukherjee. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India. Electronic address: ssdhandapani.neurosurg@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Computed tomography (CT) has become the sole modality of screening for cervical injury in polytrauma because of the high sensitivity, speed, and convenience, thereby eliminating the need for plain radiographs. PURPOSE: We report two cases of misleading artifactual fracture-subluxation of cervical spine in CT, which could have resulted in needless treatment, and describe its characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Case report and review. METHODS: Two patients who were initially diagnosed with fracture-subluxation on screening CT cervical spine were later noted to have motion artifacts and were reviewed. RESULTS: The artifactual nature of the supposed fracture-subluxation was unmasked by the soft-tissue findings of obscuration in sagittal reconstruction and duplication in axial images, along with the presence of double bony margins. CONCLUSIONS: Motion artifact in cervical CT screening can lead to a misdiagnosis of fracture subluxation. Duplication of soft tissue is highly suggestive of this motion artifact, and an additional single lateral plain radiograph may avert this pitfall.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Computed tomography (CT) has become the sole modality of screening for cervical injury in polytrauma because of the high sensitivity, speed, and convenience, thereby eliminating the need for plain radiographs. PURPOSE: We report two cases of misleading artifactual fracture-subluxation of cervical spine in CT, which could have resulted in needless treatment, and describe its characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Case report and review. METHODS: Two patients who were initially diagnosed with fracture-subluxation on screening CT cervical spine were later noted to have motion artifacts and were reviewed. RESULTS: The artifactual nature of the supposed fracture-subluxation was unmasked by the soft-tissue findings of obscuration in sagittal reconstruction and duplication in axial images, along with the presence of double bony margins. CONCLUSIONS: Motion artifact in cervical CT screening can lead to a misdiagnosis of fracture subluxation. Duplication of soft tissue is highly suggestive of this motion artifact, and an additional single lateral plain radiograph may avert this pitfall.