Diagnostic value of abdominal ultrasonography in patients with blunt abdominal trauma

Nnamonu, Michael Ikechukwu

doi:10.4103/0974-2700.120395

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluation of diagnostic tools in blunt abdominal trauma remains a contemporary issue to clarify the need for appropriate surgical intervention. 17 This study clearly describes the safety of DL as an approach in blunt abdominal trauma. With the increasing trend for limited intervention in appropriately selected hemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma, the role of DL is brought to the fore.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Laparoscopy in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Nnamonu¹

2017

WJOLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This review describes the role of laparoscopy in patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Materials and methods:Keywords, such as laparoscopy, blunt, abdominal, trauma were entered into PubMed search engine and filtered for peer-reviewed articles written in the last 5 years. Results and discussion:The findings from these articles are collated and discussed. Conclusion:Laparoscopy is a safe approach both for diagnosis and treatment of patients with blunt abdominal trauma and is associated with the benefits of laparoscopic approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Laparoscopy in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Nnamonu¹

2017

WJOLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nnamonu et al, 12 had ten false negative results on USG when scanning for the visceral parenchymal injury. Out of these patients, six had gastrointestinal injury.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of ultrasonography in diagnosing abdominal trauma compared to computed tomography scan

Prakash¹,

Kuiri²,

Naskar³

et al. 2022

Asian J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Abdominal trauma following road traffic accident is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among all age groups. Imaging such as ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) scan plays a critical role in the evaluation of these patients. The accuracy of CT scan in hemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients has been well-established. Aims and Objectives: Assessment of usefulness of USG in diagnosing abdominal trauma with reference to involvement of different organs in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive accuracy compared to CT scan. Materials and Methods: It is a hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted on 87 patients in imaging and sonology room under the Department of Radiodiagnosis, Bankura Sammilani Medical College and Hospital, Bankura, West Bengal with a time frame of years. Results: In this study, the sensitivity of USG in detecting hemoperitoneum as compared to CT was found out to be 88.8%. USG had sensitivity – 79.3%, specificity – 98.2%, positive predictive value (PPV) – 95.8%, negative predictive value (NPV) – 90.4%, and predictive accuracy – 91.9% for splenic injury. For liver injury, USG had a sensitivity – 80%, specificity – 98.5%, PPV – 94.1 %, NPV – 94.2 %, and predictive accuracy – 94.25%. For renal injury, USG had sensitivity – 83.3%, specificity – 98.6%, PPV – 90.9%, NPV – 97.3%, and predictive accuracy – 96.5%. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and predictive accuracy of USG for pancreatic injury in comparison to CT were 100%. Conclusion: When the findings of abdominal injury on USG were compared to CT scan, which was taken to be the gold standard, it was observed that USG was fairly sensitive in detecting hemoperitoneum and solid organ injury (especially when the grades of injury was higher), but it showed less sensitivity in detecting lower grades of solid organ injuries and hollow visceral injuries (such as injury to the bowel and bladder). These cases, which were missed on USG were detected on CT scan and CT scan also helped in better grading of the visceral injuries. CT also helped in better detection of other associated findings such as pelvic fractures and pneumoperitoneum.

show abstract

“…As a rapid, easy to perform, reliable, repeatable, safe, less expensive and cost effective tool, ultrasound can be an optimal screening test for BAT cases, especially in hemodynamically unstable patients in emergency departments (3). Several investigations have been done on the diagnostic value of ultrasound in BAT patients (6,7,(19)(20)(21). However, different studies have reported different results on the potency of ultrasound to show free intraperitoneal fluid.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, early diagnosis of injuries is essential and late diagnosis and overlooked injuries are associated with poor outcome (3). Some procedures like diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL), computerized tomography scan, (CT-scan), abdominal ultrasonography, and laparoscopy have been used for abdominal assessment in patients with blunt injury (4)(5)(6). Despite the very high sensitivity (96%), DPL is an invasive procedure with the incidence of 1% to 9% possible complications of trauma to the bladder, bowel, and large vessels (7).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Value of Serial Ultrasound in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Davoodabadi¹,

Marzban²,

Ghafoor³

et al. 2017

Arch Trauma Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Ultrasound has widely been used to assess patients with blunt abdominal trauma and detect free fluid in the abdomen. Nevertheless, different studies reported different false negative for this imaging technique. Objectives: The present study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic value of the repetitive ultrasound in diagnosis of free intraperitoneal fluid. Methods: In this study, 125 patients with abdominal blunt trauma were recruited prospectively for ultrasound evaluation. Ultrasound and CT-scan were performed for all recruited patients in the study. In case of positive ultrasound or CT-scan (free fluid in the peritoneal cavity), patients underwent surgical operation. In the presence of negative ultrasound and CT-scan, and if the patient was alert and had stable vital signs, then, he/she would undergo exact supervision. In such patients, ultrasound and CT-scan were repeated 12 and 24 hours after admission. If any of the tests were positive, the patient underwent laparotomy. Moreover, if ultrasound and CT-scan examinations were negative 24 hours after admission, the patients with normal laboratory tests were discharged according to the surgeon's decision. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. Results: Of the 125 patients with abdominal blunt trauma, 90 patients finally underwent laparotomy. Based on the surgical outcome as the gold standard, the initial, 12 hours, and 24 hours sensitivity were measured to be 19.

show abstract

Diagnostic value of abdominal ultrasonography in patients with blunt abdominal trauma

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Laparoscopy in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Laparoscopy in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Usefulness of ultrasonography in diagnosing abdominal trauma compared to computed tomography scan

Diagnostic Value of Serial Ultrasound in Blunt Abdominal Trauma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About