Devang Odedra1, Vincent Mellnick2, Michael Patlas3,4. 1. Department of Radiology, McMaster Universitiy, 237 Barton St. E., Hamilton, ON, L8L 2X2, Canada. devang.odedra@medportal.ca. 2. Abdominal Imaging Division, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S. Kingshighway Blvd., Campus Box 8131, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA. 3. Division of Emergency/Trauma Radiology, McMaster University, 237 Barton St. E., Hamilton, ON, L8L 2X2, Canada. 4. Department of Radiology, Hamilton General Hospital, 237 Barton St. E, Hamilton, ON, L8L 2X2, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There are no published guidelines on the follow-up imaging of non-operatively managed blunt splenic trauma (BST). We conducted an international survey of emergency radiologists to determine the ideal patient population, time period, and technique for follow-up imaging of BST. METHODS: An anonymous 10-question online survey was distributed via email to 34 emergency radiologists around the world. The survey was open for a 2-week period in 2019. A commercially available website (SurveyMonkey®) was used for survey generation and data acquisition. RESULTS: We received 29 responses (85% response rate) primarily from USA, Canada, and Europe. Majority of the institutions handled > 1000 trauma cases (69%). The initial protocol consisted of arterial and portal venous phases (PVP) in 72% of responses. Sixty-two percent of the institutions did not have a routine protocol for follow-up imaging of BST. There was no consensus on which patients received follow-up imaging. The most frequent responses had been case-per-case basis or injuries above a set AAST grade (42% and 37%, respectively). There was no set time period for follow-up imaging, but MDCT was most often performed at 24-48 h. Dual-phase protocol was utilized most commonly (69%). Majority of the institutions (88%) utilized angioembolization for hemodynamically stable patients with contained vascular injury or active extravasation. CONCLUSION: There is no consensus on the optimal patient population or time period for follow-up imaging of BST. A dual-phase follow-up MDCT protocol is utilized for follow-up by majority of institutions.
PURPOSE: There are no published guidelines on the follow-up imaging of non-operatively managed blunt splenic trauma (BST). We conducted an international survey of emergency radiologists to determine the ideal patient population, time period, and technique for follow-up imaging of BST. METHODS: An anonymous 10-question online survey was distributed via email to 34 emergency radiologists around the world. The survey was open for a 2-week period in 2019. A commercially available website (SurveyMonkey®) was used for survey generation and data acquisition. RESULTS: We received 29 responses (85% response rate) primarily from USA, Canada, and Europe. Majority of the institutions handled > 1000 trauma cases (69%). The initial protocol consisted of arterial and portal venous phases (PVP) in 72% of responses. Sixty-two percent of the institutions did not have a routine protocol for follow-up imaging of BST. There was no consensus on which patients received follow-up imaging. The most frequent responses had been case-per-case basis or injuries above a set AAST grade (42% and 37%, respectively). There was no set time period for follow-up imaging, but MDCT was most often performed at 24-48 h. Dual-phase protocol was utilized most commonly (69%). Majority of the institutions (88%) utilized angioembolization for hemodynamically stable patients with contained vascular injury or active extravasation. CONCLUSION: There is no consensus on the optimal patient population or time period for follow-up imaging of BST. A dual-phase follow-up MDCT protocol is utilized for follow-up by majority of institutions.
Authors: Thai Lan N Tran; Karen J Brasel; Riyad Karmy-Jones; Susan Rowell; Martin A Schreiber; David V Shatz; Roxie M Albrecht; Mitchell J Cohen; Marc A DeMoya; Walter L Biffl; Ernest E Moore; Nicholas Namias Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Jennifer W Uyeda; Christina A LeBedis; David R Penn; Jorge A Soto; Stephan W Anderson Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alexis R Boscak; Kathirkamanathan Shanmuganathan; Stuart E Mirvis; Thorsten R Fleiter; Lisa A Miller; Clint W Sliker; Scott D Steenburg; Melvin Alexander Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Nicole A Stassen; Indermeet Bhullar; Julius D Cheng; Marie L Crandall; Randall S Friese; Oscar D Guillamondegui; Randeep S Jawa; Adrian A Maung; Thomas J Rohs; Ayodele Sangosanya; Kevin M Schuster; Mark J Seamon; Kathryn M Tchorz; Ben L Zarzuar; Andrew J Kerwin Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Federico Coccolini; Giulia Montori; Fausto Catena; Yoram Kluger; Walter Biffl; Ernest E Moore; Viktor Reva; Camilla Bing; Miklosh Bala; Paola Fugazzola; Hany Bahouth; Ingo Marzi; George Velmahos; Rao Ivatury; Kjetil Soreide; Tal Horer; Richard Ten Broek; Bruno M Pereira; Gustavo P Fraga; Kenji Inaba; Joseph Kashuk; Neil Parry; Peter T Masiakos; Konstantinos S Mylonas; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Fikri Abu-Zidan; Carlos Augusto Gomes; Simone Vasilij Benatti; Noel Naidoo; Francesco Salvetti; Stefano Maccatrozzo; Vanni Agnoletti; Emiliano Gamberini; Leonardo Solaini; Antonio Costanzo; Andrea Celotti; Matteo Tomasoni; Vladimir Khokha; Catherine Arvieux; Lena Napolitano; Lauri Handolin; Michele Pisano; Stefano Magnone; David A Spain; Marc de Moya; Kimberly A Davis; Nicola De Angelis; Ari Leppaniemi; Paula Ferrada; Rifat Latifi; David Costa Navarro; Yashuiro Otomo; Raul Coimbra; Ronald V Maier; Frederick Moore; Sandro Rizoli; Boris Sakakushev; Joseph M Galante; Osvaldo Chiara; Stefania Cimbanassi; Alain Chichom Mefire; Dieter Weber; Marco Ceresoli; Andrew B Peitzman; Liban Wehlie; Massimo Sartelli; Salomone Di Saverio; Luca Ansaloni Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2017-08-18 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Mauro Podda; Belinda De Simone; Marco Ceresoli; Francesco Virdis; Francesco Favi; Johannes Wiik Larsen; Federico Coccolini; Massimo Sartelli; Nikolaos Pararas; Solomon Gurmu Beka; Luigi Bonavina; Raffaele Bova; Adolfo Pisanu; Fikri Abu-Zidan; Zsolt Balogh; Osvaldo Chiara; Imtiaz Wani; Philip Stahel; Salomone Di Saverio; Thomas Scalea; Kjetil Soreide; Boris Sakakushev; Francesco Amico; Costanza Martino; Andreas Hecker; Nicola de'Angelis; Mircea Chirica; Joseph Galante; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Emmanouil Pikoulis; Yoram Kluger; Denis Bensard; Luca Ansaloni; Gustavo Fraga; Ian Civil; Giovanni Domenico Tebala; Isidoro Di Carlo; Yunfeng Cui; Raul Coimbra; Vanni Agnoletti; Ibrahima Sall; Edward Tan; Edoardo Picetti; Andrey Litvin; Dimitrios Damaskos; Kenji Inaba; Jeffrey Leung; Ronald Maier; Walt Biffl; Ari Leppaniemi; Ernest Moore; Kurinchi Gurusamy; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2022-10-12 Impact factor: 8.165
Authors: James T Lee; Emily Slade; Jennifer Uyeda; Scott D Steenburg; Suzanne T Chong; Richard Tsai; Demetrios Raptis; Ken F Linnau; Naga R Chinapuvvula; Matthew P Dattwyler; Adam Dugan; Arthur Baghdanian; Carl Flink; Armonde Baghdanian; Christina A LeBedis Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 11.105