Are We Missing Traumatic Bowel and Mesenteric Injuries?

PURPOSE: Traumatic bowel and mesenteric injury (TBMI), although an uncommon entity, can be lethal if not detected and treated in a timely manner. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for the detection of TBMI in patients at our level 1 trauma centre. METHODS: We used our hospital's trauma registry to identify patients with a diagnosis of TBMI from January 1, 2006, to June 30, 2013. Only patients who had a 64-slice MDCT scan at presentation and subsequently underwent laparotomy or laparoscopy were included in the study cohort. Using the surgical findings as the gold standard, the accuracy of prospective radiology reports was analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 4781 trauma patients who presented to our institution, 44 (0.92%) had surgically proven TBMI. Twenty-two of 44 were excluded as they did not have MDCT before surgery. The study cohort consisted of 14 males and 8 females with a median age of 41.5 years and a median injury severity score of 27. In total 17 of 22 had blunt trauma and 5 of 22 had penetrating injury. A correct preoperative imaging diagnosis of TBMI was made in 14 of 22 of patients. The overall sensitivity of the radiology reports was 63.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 41%-82%), specificity was 79.6% (95% CI: 67%-89%), PPV was 53.9% (95% CI: 33%-73%), and the NPV was 85.5% (95% CI: 73%-94%). Accuracy was calculated at 75.3%. However, only 59% (10 of 17) of patients with blunt injury had a correct preoperative diagnosis. Review of the findings demonstrated that majority of patients with missed blunt TBMI (5 of 7) demonstrated only indirect signs of injury. CONCLUSION: The detection of TBMI in trauma patients on 64-slice MDCT can be improved, especially in patients presenting with blunt injury. Missed cases in this population occurred because the possibility of TBMI was not considered despite the presence of indirect imaging signs. The prospective diagnosis of TBMI remains challenging despite advances in CT technology and widespread use of 64-slice MDCT.

Do family physicians request ultrasound scans appropriately?

OBJECTIVE: To review family physicians' requests for abdominal, thyroid, pelvic, soft tissue, and carotid ultrasound (US) scans, and to determine whether 5% or more of these tests were not clearly indicated based on the clinical history provided. DESIGN: Analysis of 620 randomly chosen requests for US scans. SETTING: The Radiology Department at the Capital District Health Authority in Halifax, NS, between October 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: Two radiologists and 2 family physicians with clinical expertise and familiarity with the Canadian Association of Radiologists' 2005 guidelines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Whether US requests were "indicated," "not clearly indicated," or "not legible" according to the Canadian Association of Radiologists' 2005 guidelines. Those that were illegible were discarded and replaced. Results More than 5% of requests for abdominal, thyroid, or carotid US scans were not clearly indicated. The percentages of requests for pelvic and soft tissue scans that were not clearly indicated were not significant. The reviewers found only 5 illegible request forms. Percentages of abdominal, thyroid, and carotid US scans not clearly indicated were 12.1%, 18.8%, and 25.2%, respectively. Reasons for inappropriate US requests included the following: wrong tests (3.2%), vague clinical questions (4.8%), and unfocused examinations (4.8%) for abdominal scans; wrong tests (3.2%), vague clinical questions (3.2%), unnecessary investigations (5.6%), and unnecessary follow-up examinations (5.6%) for thyroid scans; and unnecessary tests (10.5%), vague clinical questions (5.6%), and unnecessary tests for "dizziness" (10.5%) for carotid scans. CONCLUSION: More than 5% of the abdominal, thyroid, and carotid US scans requested by family physicians were not clearly indicated based on the clinical history provided. Common trends in requesting these examinations reinforce the need to improve guidelines for requesting scans and for managing many presenting complaints in family practice.