Abstract:MRI allowed to make a better assessment of injuries than CEUS, allowing also a temporal stage of lesions. Infact, there are different evolution stages corresponding to accurate imaging findings. To our knowledge, this is the first study that describes the evolution of blood collection in parenchymal abdominal organs. Therefore, in patients who underwent abdominal traumatic injuries conservatively treated, the follow-up at 1 month can be made by MRI, due to its panoramicity and its high contrast resolution, whi… Show more
“…Four citations were excluded because two studies included only patients with CT-confirmed solid organ injury 22, 23 , one was duplicated report 16 , and one is a case series report 24 . As a result, a total of 10 studies were included in the study and 9 were included for meta-analysis 14, 15, 25–32 .Figure 1PRISMA flow chart of study inclusion. The initial search identified 421 citations.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies investigated the three major solid organs including kidney, spleen and liver. One study investigated diagnostic accuracy of CEUS on adrenals and found that CEUS missed two adrenal lesions as compared with CT 14 . Valentino’s study included patients with blunt abdominal trauma in which they among other injuries identified lesions in the pancreas and adrenals 29 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The included studies reported a wide range in the study participants’ age. One study included pediatric patients 26 , and two studies included both adult and pediatric patients 14, 15 . Three studies did not report summary statistics for the age 28–30 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three studies did not report summary statistics for the age 28–30 . Timing of CEUS was reported in two studies 14, 27 , and the remaining studies did not explicitly report the timing of CEUS. All studies reported the CT as reference standard, against which CEUS was compared.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there are conflicting results in these studies, and there may be difference in the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for different solid organs (e.g. kidney, spleen and liver) 14–16 . Therefore, a systematic review of literature was performed in the present study, aiming to provide state-of-the-art evidence on the use of CEUS for patients presenting to the emergency department with blunt abdominal trauma.…”
We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in evaluating blunt abdominal trauma for patients presenting to the emergency department. Electronic search of Scopus and Pubmed was performed from inception to September 2016. Human studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in identifying abdominal solid organ injuries were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS tool. A total of 10 studies were included in the study and 9 of them were included for meta-analysis. The log(DOR) values ranged from 3.80 (95% CI: 2.81–4.79) to 8.52 (95% CI: 4.58–12.47) in component studies. The combined log(DOR) was 6.56 (95% CI: 5.66–7.45). The Cochran’s Q was 11.265 (p = 0.793 with 16 degrees of freedom), and the Higgins’ I2 was 0%. The CEUS had a sensitivity of 0.981 (95% CI: 0.868–0.950) and a false positive rate of 0.018 (95% CI: 0.010–0.032) for identifying parenchymal injuries, with an AUC of 0.984. CEUS performed at emergency department had good diagnostic accuracy in identifying abdominal solid organ injuries. CEUS can be recommended in monitoring solid organ injuries, especially for patients managed with non-operative strategy.
“…Four citations were excluded because two studies included only patients with CT-confirmed solid organ injury 22, 23 , one was duplicated report 16 , and one is a case series report 24 . As a result, a total of 10 studies were included in the study and 9 were included for meta-analysis 14, 15, 25–32 .Figure 1PRISMA flow chart of study inclusion. The initial search identified 421 citations.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies investigated the three major solid organs including kidney, spleen and liver. One study investigated diagnostic accuracy of CEUS on adrenals and found that CEUS missed two adrenal lesions as compared with CT 14 . Valentino’s study included patients with blunt abdominal trauma in which they among other injuries identified lesions in the pancreas and adrenals 29 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The included studies reported a wide range in the study participants’ age. One study included pediatric patients 26 , and two studies included both adult and pediatric patients 14, 15 . Three studies did not report summary statistics for the age 28–30 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three studies did not report summary statistics for the age 28–30 . Timing of CEUS was reported in two studies 14, 27 , and the remaining studies did not explicitly report the timing of CEUS. All studies reported the CT as reference standard, against which CEUS was compared.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there are conflicting results in these studies, and there may be difference in the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for different solid organs (e.g. kidney, spleen and liver) 14–16 . Therefore, a systematic review of literature was performed in the present study, aiming to provide state-of-the-art evidence on the use of CEUS for patients presenting to the emergency department with blunt abdominal trauma.…”
We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in evaluating blunt abdominal trauma for patients presenting to the emergency department. Electronic search of Scopus and Pubmed was performed from inception to September 2016. Human studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in identifying abdominal solid organ injuries were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS tool. A total of 10 studies were included in the study and 9 of them were included for meta-analysis. The log(DOR) values ranged from 3.80 (95% CI: 2.81–4.79) to 8.52 (95% CI: 4.58–12.47) in component studies. The combined log(DOR) was 6.56 (95% CI: 5.66–7.45). The Cochran’s Q was 11.265 (p = 0.793 with 16 degrees of freedom), and the Higgins’ I2 was 0%. The CEUS had a sensitivity of 0.981 (95% CI: 0.868–0.950) and a false positive rate of 0.018 (95% CI: 0.010–0.032) for identifying parenchymal injuries, with an AUC of 0.984. CEUS performed at emergency department had good diagnostic accuracy in identifying abdominal solid organ injuries. CEUS can be recommended in monitoring solid organ injuries, especially for patients managed with non-operative strategy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
