Radiological emergency room management with emphasis on multidetector-row CT

Philipp, M.; Kubin, K.; Hörmann, Marcus; Metz, V.

doi:10.1016/s0720-048x(03)00206-7

Cited by 78 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another key factor is the time required for radiologic examination, which, because the chance of survival increases the sooner trauma care is initiated, must be as short as possible [1,3]. The reliability and workflow of MDCT for emergency purposes have been supported by the results of several studies [3][4][5][6][7]. MDCT scanners are widely used because they rapidly produce high-resolution scans of large areas, offering short examination times for multiple body regions under emergency conditions.…”

Section: Cmementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Single-Pass Continuous Whole-Body 16-MDCT Protocol for Patients with Polytrauma

Nguyên

Platon

Shanmuganathan

et al. 2009

American Journal of Roentgenology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

examinations most often include the head, cervical spine, and thorax to pelvis. Although MDCT data acquisition time is no longer a cause of time delays, the need to reposition patients for conventional protocols can be time consuming [5,7]. Gralla et al. [5] reported the results of a prospective study in which 497 patients underwent whole-body CT. The mean repositioning time was 8 minutes, accounting for up to 26% of the total time in the CT room.The aim of our prospective study was to compare the acquisition times and image quality of two single-pass continuous wholebody MDCT protocols with those of our conventional segmental whole-body MDCT protocol. Two single-pass protocols with various injection flow rates and iodine concentrations were evaluated. S p e c i a l A r t ic l e • O r ig i n a l R e s e a rc h CMEThis article is available for CME credit. See www.arrs.org for more information. CT assessment of such patients should be systematic, complete, and accurate. Another key factor is the time required for radiologic examination, which, because the chance of survival increases the sooner trauma care is initiated, must be as short as possible [1,3]. The reliability and workflow of MDCT for emergency purposes have been supported by the results of several studies [3][4][5][6][7]. MDCT scanners are widely used because they rapidly produce high-resolution scans of large areas, offering short examination times for multiple body regions under emergency conditions. Such OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare a conventional multiregional MDCT protocol with two continuous single-pass whole-body MDCT protocols in imaging of patients with polytrauma. SUBJECTS AND METHODS.Ninety patients with polytrauma underwent wholebody 16-MDCT with a conventional (n = 30) or one of two single-pass (n = 60) protocols. The conventional protocol included unenhanced scans of the head and cervical spine and contrastenhanced helical scans (140 mL, 4 mL/s, 300 mg I/mL) of the thorax and abdomen. The single-pass protocols consisted of unenhanced scans of the head followed by one-sweep acquisition from the circle of Willis through the pubic symphysis with a biphasic (150 mL, 6 and 4 mL/s, 300 mg I/mL) or monophasic (110 mL, 4 mL/s, 400 mg I/mL) injection. Acquisition times and interval delays between head, chest, and abdominal scans were recorded. Contrast enhancement was measured in the aortic arch, liver, spleen, and kidney. Diagnostic image quality in the same areas was assessed on a 4-point scale.RESULTS. Median acquisition times for the single-pass protocols were significantly shorter (-42.5%) than the acquisition time for the conventional protocol. No significant differences were found in mean enhancement values in the aorta, liver, spleen, and kidney for the three protocols. The image quality with both single-pass protocols was better than that with the conventional protocol in assessment of the mediastinum and cervical spine (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the single-pass protocols.CONCLUSION. Us...

show abstract

Section: Cmementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Single-Pass Continuous Whole-Body 16-MDCT Protocol for Patients with Polytrauma

Nguyên

Platon

Shanmuganathan

et al. 2009

American Journal of Roentgenology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, MSCT is overused or misused in many centers. 7,11 The aim of this study was to retrospectively examine the whole body MSCT in trauma patients presenting to emergency department. We aimed to determine the rate of ordering whole body MSCT and detection of pathologic findings; we also attempted to determine which body regions had injuries detected on MSCT.…”

Section: E7mentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective Analysis of Whole-Body Multislice Computed Tomography Findings Taken in Trauma Patients

Köse¹

2015

Tr J Emerg Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObjectives: Using whole-body multislice computed tomography (MSCT) excessively or with irrelevant indications can be seen in many centers. The aim of this study was to analyze retrospectively the MSCT findings in trauma patients admitted to the emergency department. Methods: Records of the patients who have applied to the emergency department due to blunt trauma in a 12 month period and whose whole body MSCT images have been taken, were evaluated using the "Nucleus Medical Information System". Results: The most frequent type of trauma was traffic accidents in 61.4%, falling down from the height in 22.4%, and motorcycle accidents in 11.4% of patients. Of the patients, 25.2% were discharged from the emergency, while 73.8% were hospitalized. At least one CT findings associated with trauma was present in 61.4% of our patients. Pathological findings in MSCT were most frequently detected in the head and face (35.3%) and thoracic (28.6%) regions, respectively. The most common finding in the head and face region was fractures. The most common pathological findings in the thoracic region were pulmonary contusion and rib fractures. A significant relationship was detected between trauma type and spinal MSCT result (p < 0.001). In a large percentage of the patients, MSCT findings were normal in the abdominal region and genitourinary system. Vertebral fractures were most frequently detected in the thoracolumbar region. Conclusions: In our study, our rate of negative CT was found to be 38.6%, which is a higher ratio compared to other studies conducte on this topic.

show abstract

“…Emergency CT plays a major role in diagnostic workflow in the evaluation of patients with polytrauma [1,2]. These patients usually have simultaneous injuries to several anatomic regions or organs [1,3]. MDCT scanners are widely used because they rapidly produce high-resolution scans of large areas, offering short examination times for multiple body regions under emergency conditions [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These patients usually have simultaneous injuries to several anatomic regions or organs [1,3]. MDCT scanners are widely used because they rapidly produce high-resolution scans of large areas, offering short examination times for multiple body regions under emergency conditions [3]. Such examinations most often include the head, cervical spine, and thorax to pelvis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Multidetector CT in Evaluation of Polytrauma Patients

Dwivedi¹

2014

J Trauma Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiological emergency room management with emphasis on multidetector-row CT

Cited by 78 publications

References 20 publications

Evaluation of a Single-Pass Continuous Whole-Body 16-MDCT Protocol for Patients with Polytrauma

Evaluation of a Single-Pass Continuous Whole-Body 16-MDCT Protocol for Patients with Polytrauma

Retrospective Analysis of Whole-Body Multislice Computed Tomography Findings Taken in Trauma Patients

Role of Multidetector CT in Evaluation of Polytrauma Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About