scholarly journals The Role of CT Angiography in Evaluating Lower Extremity Trauma: 157 Patient Case Series at a Military Treatment Facility

2019 ◽  
Vol 184 (9-10) ◽  
pp. e490-e493
Author(s):  
Sean P Kelly ◽  
Genevieve Rambau ◽  
David J Tennent ◽  
Patrick M Osborn

Abstract Introduction Physical exam and angiography have important roles in the diagnosis of traumatic lower extremity vascular injury with similar reported high rates of sensitivity and specificity. It has been previously shown that CTA is not universally indicated in the setting of acute lower extremity trauma when a reliable physical examination is obtained. As such, the purpose of this study was to determine if obtaining a CTA following physical examination altered the clinical care of patients following high-energy lower extremity trauma and the generalizability to the military population. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of all patients who underwent lower extremity CTA during the initial trauma evaluation at a Level 1 Trauma Center from 2007 to 2014. Results One hundred and fifty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred and seventeen patient’s initial physical exam excluded limb ischemia with 67 vascular injuries on CTA (9 underwent angiogram in the OR) with no reperfusions required. 40 patients had hard signs of ischemia or ABI’s <0.90, 29 had injuries on CTA, and fifteen underwent a vascular reperfusion procedure for acute vascular injury. Ten of 15 reperfusions required no further angiography after CTA. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of physical exam for needed reperfusion were both 100%. There were no instances of missed vascular injury or readmission and 53 patients were discharged directly from the emergency room after a negative CTA. Conclusions This study suggests that physical exam alone achieves a high sensitivity for vascular injury in lower extremity trauma. Physical exam excluded all lower extremity ischemia without the need for advanced imaging. While CTA was useful to confirm and localize the source of acute vascular injury, the majority of vascular injuries identified on CTA did not affect immediate clinical care and lead to additional unnecessary procedures. However, in patients with suspected vascular injury, a negative CTA was also used as rationale for immediate discharge from the emergency department without further clinical observation. When applied to the deployed military setting the results of this study support the use of physical exam to accurately diagnose limb threatening ischemia at the time of injury or Role 1 facilities with CTA reserved for diagnosing the level of the vascular injury and for potential patient clearance prior to prolonged evacuation.

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. e255
Author(s):  
Jake F. Hemingway ◽  
Enock Adjei ◽  
Nam Tran ◽  
Niten Singh ◽  
Benjamin W. Starnes ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (09) ◽  
pp. 625-633
Author(s):  
Lily R. Mundy ◽  
Anne Klassen ◽  
Amanda R. Sergesketter ◽  
Andrew Jordan Grier ◽  
Matthew J. Carty ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Limb-threatening lower extremity traumatic injuries can be devastating events with a multifaceted impact on patients. Therefore, evaluating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in addition to traditional surgical outcomes is important. However, currently available instruments are limited as they were not developed specific to lower extremity trauma patients and lack content validity. The LIMB-Q is being developed as a novel PRO instrument to meet this need, with the goal to measure all relevant concepts and issues impacting amputation and limb-salvage patients after limb-threatening lower extremity trauma. Methods This is a qualitative interview-based study evaluating content validity for the LIMB-Q. Patients aged 18 years and older who underwent amputation, reconstruction, or amputation after failed reconstruction were recruited using purposeful sampling to maximize variability of participant experiences. Expert opinion was solicited from a variety of clinical providers and qualitative researchers internationally. Preliminary items and scales were modified, added, or removed based on participant and expert feedback after each round of participant interviews and expert opinion. Results Twelve patients and 43 experts provided feedback in a total of three rounds, with changes to the preliminary instrument made between each round. One scale was dropped after round one, one scale was added after round two, and only minor changes were needed after round three. Modifications, additions and removal of items, instructions, and response options were made after each round using feedback gathered. Conclusion The LIMB-Q was refined and modified to reflect feedback from patients and experts in the field. Content validity for the LIMB-Q was established. Following a large-scale field test, the LIMB-Q will be ready for use in research and clinical care.


2002 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 641-649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc F. Swiontkowski ◽  
Ellen J. MacKenzie ◽  
Michael J. Bosse ◽  
Alan L. Jones ◽  
T. Travison

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 455-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen J. MacKenzie ◽  
Michael J. Bosse ◽  
James F. Kellam ◽  
Andrew R. Burgess ◽  
Lawrence X. Webb ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000828
Author(s):  
Riley Brian ◽  
Daniel J Bennett ◽  
Woon Cho Kim ◽  
Deborah M Stein

BackgroundExtremity CT angiography (CTA) is frequently used to assess for vascular injury among patients with extremity trauma. The injured extremity index (IEI), defined as the ratio of systolic occlusion pressure between injured and uninjured extremities, has been implemented to screen patients being considered for CTA. Physical examination together with IEI is extremely sensitive for significant extremity vascular injury. Unfortunately, IEI cannot always be calculated. This study aimed to determine whether patients with normal pulse examinations and no hard signs of vascular injury benefitted from further imaging with CTA. We hypothesized that CTA has become overused among patients with extremity trauma, as determined by the outcome of vascular abnormalities that underwent vascular intervention but were missed by physical examination.MethodsThe charts of traumatically injured patients who underwent extremity CTA were retrospectively reviewed. This study was performed at a level 1 trauma center for patients who presented as trauma activations from September 1, 2019 to September 1, 2020.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-six patients with 167 injured limbs were included. Eight limbs (4.8%) underwent an open vascular operation, whereas five limbs (3.0%) underwent an endovascular procedure. One of the 167 limbs (0.6%) had a vascular injury seen on CTA and underwent intervention that was not associated with a pulse abnormality or hard signs of vascular injury. This patient presented in a delayed fashion after an initially normal IEI and examination. Proximity injuries and fractures alone were not highly associated with vascular injuries.DiscussionMany patients with normal pulse examination and no hard signs of vascular injury underwent CTA; the vast majority of these patients did not then have a vascular intervention. Given the consequences of missed vascular injuries, further work is required to prospectively assess the utility of CTA among patients with extremity trauma.Level of evidenceIII.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 716-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert V OʼToole ◽  
Renan C Castillo ◽  
Andrew N Pollak ◽  
Ellen J MacKenzie ◽  
Michael J Bosse

2012 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. S112-S115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanne C. Patzkowski ◽  
Johnny G. Owens ◽  
Ryan V. Blanck ◽  
Kevin L. Kirk ◽  
Joseph R. Hsu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document