• J Trauma · Oct 2003

    Are five-view plain films of the cervical spine unreliable? A prospective evaluation in blunt trauma patients with altered mental status.

    • Jose J Diaz, Cyril Gillman, John A Morris, Addison K May, Ysela M Carrillo, and Jeffrey Guy.
    • Department of Surgery, Trauma Paatient Care Center, Banderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee 37212, USA. jose.diaz@vanderbilt.edu
    • J Trauma. 2003 Oct 1;55(4):658-63; discussion 663-4.

    ObjectivesClearing the cervical spine in a time-sensitive fashion is difficult. We hypothesized that admission computed tomographic scan of the occiput to T1 (CTS) with multiplanar reformatted images will replace five-view (odontoid, anteroposterior, lateral, and oblique) plain films of the cervical spine (CSX) in the initial evaluation of blunt trauma patients with altered mental status.MethodsBetween January and July 2001, all patients aged 16 years or older with altered mental status undergoing both CTS and CSX were prospectively entered into the study group. Attending physician interpretation defined the presence of cervical spine injury. Unstable fractures were defined as requiring surgical or halo stabilization.ResultsOne thousand six patients met study criteria. One hundred sixteen patients had 172 cervical spine injuries (CSIs) (fracture and subluxation). CSX missed 90 of 172 (52.3%) CSIs in 65 of 172 (56.0%) patients. Anatomically, CSX failed to identify 14 of 15 occipital fractures (93.3%), 17 of 36 (47.2%) C1-3 fractures, and 59 of 121 (48.8%) C4-T1 CSIs. CSX failed to identify 5 of 29 (17.2%) patients with unstable CSIs. CTS failed to diagnose 3 of 172 (1.7%) CSIs that were stable (spinous process fractures at C6-7). Two patients exhibited spinal cord injury without radiologic abnormality missed by both modalities. CTS had a sensitivity of 97.4%, a specificity of 100%, a prevalence of 11.5%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and a negative predictive value of 99.7%. CSX had a sensitivity of 44.0%, a specificity of 100%, a prevalence of 11.5%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and a negative predictive value of 93.2%.ConclusionCTS outperformed five-view CSX in a group of patients with altered mental status or distracting injuries. Five-view CSX failed to diagnose 52.3% of cervical spine fractures identified by CTS. Five-view CSX failed to diagnose five patients with unstable cervical fractures and failed to identify 93.3% of patients with occipital condyle fractures.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.