Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med ; 32(1): 63, 2024 Jul 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39039608

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND DATA: Computed Tomography (CT) is the gold standard for cervical spine (c-spine) evaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) emerges due to its increasing availability and the lack of radiation exposure. However, MRI is costly and time-consuming, questioning its role in the emergency department (ED). This study investigates the added the value of an additional MRI for patients presenting with a c-spine injury in the ED. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective monocenter cohort study that included all patients with neck trauma presenting in the ED, who received imaging based on the NEXUS criteria. Spine surgeons performed a full-case review to classify each case into "c-spine injured" and "c-spine uninjured". Injuries were classified according to the AO Spine classification. We assessed patients with a c-spine injury detected by CT, who received a subsequent MRI. In this subset, injuries were classified separately in both imaging modalities. We monitored the treatment changes after the additional MRI to evaluate characteristics of this cohort and the impact of the AO Spine Neurology/Modifier modifiers. RESULTS: We identified 4496 subjects, 2321 were eligible for inclusion and 186 were diagnosed with c-spine injuries in the retrospective case review. Fifty-six patients with a c-spine injury initially identified through CT received an additional MRI. The additional MRI significantly extended (geometric mean ratio 1.32, p < 0.001) the duration of the patients' stay in the ED. Of this cohort, 25% had a change in treatment strategy and among the patients with neurological symptoms (AON ≥ 1), 45.8% experienced a change in treatment. Patients that were N-positive, had a 12.4 (95% CI 2.7-90.7, p < 0.01) times higher odds of a treatment change after an additional MRI than neurologically intact patients. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Our study suggests that patients with a c-spine injury and neurological symptoms benefit from an additional MRI. In neurologically intact patients, an additional MRI retains value only when carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis.


Subject(s)
Cervical Vertebrae , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Spinal Injuries , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Male , Female , Cervical Vertebrae/injuries , Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Spinal Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Spinal Injuries/diagnosis , Spinal Injuries/therapy , Middle Aged , Adult , Emergency Service, Hospital , Neck Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Neck Injuries/diagnosis , Clinical Decision-Making/methods
2.
Injury ; 54(7): 110771, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37164902

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Traumatic cervical spine (c-spine) injuries account for 10% of all spinal injuries. The c-spine is prone to injury by blunt acceleration/deceleration traumas. The Canadian C-Spine rule and NEXUS criteria guide clinical decision-making but lack consensus on imaging modality when necessary. This study aims to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of CT, MRI, X-Ray, and, for the first time, LODOX-Statscan in identifying c-spine injuries in patients with blunt trauma and neck pain. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective monocenter cohort study using patient data from the emergency department at Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland's largest level one trauma center. We identified patients presenting with trauma and neck pain during the recruitment period from 01.01.2012 to 31.12.2017. We included all patients that required a radiographic c-spine evaluation according to the NEXUS criteria. Certified spine surgeons reviewed each case, analyzed patient demographics, injury classification, trauma mechanism, and emergency management. The retrospective full case review was established as gold standard to decide whether the c-spine was injured. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for CT, MRI, LODOX, and X-Ray imaging methods. RESULTS: We identified 4996 patients, of which 2321 met the inclusion criteria. 91.3% (n = 2120) patients received a CT scan, 8.9% (n = 206) a MRI, 9.3% (n = 215) an X-ray, and 21.5% (n = 498) a LODOX scan. By retrospective case review, 186 participants were classified as injured. The sensitivity of CT was 88.6% (specificity 99%), and 89.8% (specificity 99.2%) with orthopedic surgeon consultation. MRI had a sensitivity of 88.5% (specificity of 96.9%); highlighting 14 cases correctly diagnosed as injured by MRI and misdiagnosed by CT. Projection radiography (36.4% sensitivity, 95.1% specificity) and LODOX (5.3% sensitivity, 100% specificity) were unsuitable for ruling out spinal injury. CONCLUSION: While CT offers high sensitivity for detecting traumatic c-spine injury, MRI holds clinical significance in revealing injuries not recognized by CT in symptomatic patients. LODOX and projection radiography are insufficient for accurately ruling out c-spine injury. For patients with neurological symptoms, we recommend extended MRI use when CT scans are negative.


Subject(s)
Neck Injuries , Spinal Injuries , Wounds, Nonpenetrating , Humans , X-Rays , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Neck Pain/diagnostic imaging , Neck Pain/etiology , Canada , Radiography , Spinal Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/diagnostic imaging , Neck Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Sensitivity and Specificity , Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Cervical Vertebrae/injuries
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL