Abstract
The efficacy of conventional chest X-ray (CXR) in comparison to chest computed tomography (CCT) in acutely injured blunt trauma patients was examined. Over a 21-month period, 50 patients underwent CXR and CCT according to a standard protocol, and their films and records were reviewed retrospectively. Hemo- and/or pneumothorax (HPTX) was noted in 12 patients (five by CXR, 12 by CCT). Pulmonary contusion (PC) was identified in ten patients (four by CXR, ten by CCT). Three additional false positive PC were diagnosed by CXR. Therapy changes based upon CCT findings occurred in seven of seven HPTX and five of six PC. The two imaging techniques were complementary in detecting fractures. Atelectasis was a common CCT finding (58% incidence). Chest X-ray is less sensitive than chest computed tomography in the detection of HPTX (42% vs. 100%) and PC (40% vs. 100%). Emergent chest computed tomography is recommended in stable patients with: 1) blunt high-energy torso trauma, 2) "cross-body" injury pattern, and/or 3) a mechanism of injury suggestive of chest trauma.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
