Andrew T Hale1, Abraham Alvarado2, Amita K Bey2, Sumit Pruthi3, Gregory A Mencio4, Christopher M Bonfield5, Jeffrey E Martus4, Robert P Naftel2,5. 1. Surgical Outcomes Center for Kids, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. Andrew.hale@vanderbilt.edu. 2. Surgical Outcomes Center for Kids, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. 4. Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. 5. Division of Neurological Surgery, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital of Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Evaluation of cervical spine injury (CSI) in children requires rapid, yet accurate assessment of damage. Given concerns of radiation exposure, expert consensus advises that computed tomography (CT) should be used sparingly. However, CT can provide superior image resolution and detection of pathology. Herein, we evaluate if X-ray offers equal diagnostic accuracy compared to CT imaging in identifying CSI in children. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between October 2000 and March 2012 of pediatric patients evaluated for cervical spine injury at a level 1 trauma center. All patients included in this study were imaged with cervical spine X-rays and CT at the time of injury. Demographic information, mechanism of injury, significant versus non-significant injury (as defined by the NEXUS criteria), radiographic findings, level of the injury, presence of spinal cord injury, treatment, clinical outcome, and length of follow-up were collected. Chi-squared (χ 2) and Fisher's exact tests were used as appropriate and means and standard deviations were reported. RESULTS: We identified 1296 patients who were screened for CSI. Of those, 164 patients were diagnosed with spinal cord/column injuries (CSI). Eighty-nine patients were excluded for only having a CT or X-ray imaging without the other modality. Thus, a total of 75 patients with CSI were included in the final cohort. Using the NEXUS definitions, 78% of patients had clinically significant injuries while 22% had non-significant injuries. There were no injuries detected on X-ray that were not also detected on CT. For all injuries, X-ray sensitivity was 50.7%. X-rays were more sensitive to significant injuries (62.3%) compared in non-significant injuries, which were missed on all X-rays (0%). Therefore, X-rays did not identify 24 significant cervical spine injuries (32%) as defined by NEXUS. CONCLUSIONS: CT is superior to X-rays in detecting both clinically significant and insignificant cervical spine injuries. These results were not dependent on patient age or location of the injury. We recommend CT imaging in the evaluation of suspected cervical spine injuries in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: Evaluation of cervical spine injury (CSI) in children requires rapid, yet accurate assessment of damage. Given concerns of radiation exposure, expert consensus advises that computed tomography (CT) should be used sparingly. However, CT can provide superior image resolution and detection of pathology. Herein, we evaluate if X-ray offers equal diagnostic accuracy compared to CT imaging in identifying CSI in children. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between October 2000 and March 2012 of pediatric patients evaluated for cervical spine injury at a level 1 trauma center. All patients included in this study were imaged with cervical spine X-rays and CT at the time of injury. Demographic information, mechanism of injury, significant versus non-significant injury (as defined by the NEXUS criteria), radiographic findings, level of the injury, presence of spinal cord injury, treatment, clinical outcome, and length of follow-up were collected. Chi-squared (χ 2) and Fisher's exact tests were used as appropriate and means and standard deviations were reported. RESULTS: We identified 1296 patients who were screened for CSI. Of those, 164 patients were diagnosed with spinal cord/column injuries (CSI). Eighty-nine patients were excluded for only having a CT or X-ray imaging without the other modality. Thus, a total of 75 patients with CSI were included in the final cohort. Using the NEXUS definitions, 78% of patients had clinically significant injuries while 22% had non-significant injuries. There were no injuries detected on X-ray that were not also detected on CT. For all injuries, X-ray sensitivity was 50.7%. X-rays were more sensitive to significant injuries (62.3%) compared in non-significant injuries, which were missed on all X-rays (0%). Therefore, X-rays did not identify 24 significant cervical spine injuries (32%) as defined by NEXUS. CONCLUSIONS: CT is superior to X-rays in detecting both clinically significant and insignificant cervical spine injuries. These results were not dependent on patient age or location of the injury. We recommend CT imaging in the evaluation of suspected cervical spine injuries in children. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Richard C E Anderson; Peter Kan; Monique Vanaman; Jeanne Rubsam; Kristine W Hansen; Eric R Scaife; Douglas L Brockmeyer Journal: J Neurosurg Pediatr Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Adriana-Natalia Murgoci; Ladislav Baciak; Veronika Cubinkova; Tomas Smolek; Tomas Tvrdik; Ivo Juranek; Jozef Kafka; Dasa Cizkova Journal: Neurochem Res Date: 2019-05-04 Impact factor: 3.996