Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST): results from an international consensus conference

Emergency care focus: A FASTer method of detecting abdominal trauma

Focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) is a rapid, noninvasive, and highly accurate diagnostic tool that identifies life-threatening accumulations of blood and other intra-abdominal fluids following trauma.

Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma in weightlessness: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examines for fluid in gravitationally dependent regions. There is no prior experience with this technique in weightlessness, such as on the International Space Station, where sonography is currently the only diagnostic imaging tool.

STUDY DESIGN

A ground-based (1 g) porcine model for sonography was developed. We examined both the feasibility and the comparative performance of the FAST examination in parabolic flight. Sonographic detection and fluid behavior were evaluated in four animals during alternating weightlessness (0 g) and hypergravity (1.8 g) periods. During flight, boluses of fluid were incrementally introduced into the peritoneal cavity. Standardized sonographic windows were recorded. Postflight, the video recordings were divided into 169 20-second segments for subsequent interpretation by 12 blinded ultrasonography experts. Reviewers first decided whether a video segment was of sufficient diagnostic quality to analyze (determinate). Determinate segments were then analyzed as containing or not containing fluid. A probit regression model compared the probability of a positive fluid diagnosis to actual fluid levels (0 to 500 mL) under both 0-g and 1.8-g conditions.

RESULTS

The in-flight sonographers found real-time scanning and interpretation technically similar to that of terrestrial conditions, as long as restraint was maintained. On blinded review, 80% of the recorded ultrasound segments were considered determinate. The best sensitivity for diagnosis in 0 g was found to be from the subhepatic space, with probability of a positive fluid diagnosis ranging from 9% (no fluid) to 51% (500 mL fluid).

CONCLUSIONS

The FAST examination is technically feasible in weightlessness, and merits operational consideration for clinical contingencies in space.

Early detection of cardiac disease masquerading as acute bronchospasm: The role of bedside limited echocardiography by the emergency physician

We report two cases in which the patients experienced dyspnea, cough, and acute bronchospasm. Pulmonary pathology was initially suspected. Failure to respond to an initial trial of inhaled bronchodilator prompted the use of bedside limited echocardiography by the emergency physician. The potential role of limited echocardiography by the emergency physician as a triage tool in facilitating early diagnosis and emergent therapy, reducing time to final discharge, and enhancing interaction between the pediatric emergency physician and cardiology consultants is highlighted.

Emergency ultrasound credentialling for focused assessment sonography in trauma and abdominal aortic aneurysm: A practical approach for Australasia

OBJECTIVE

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma and emergency ultrasound for abdominal aortic aneurysm are now practiced widely by non-radiologists in emergency departments worldwide. Various credentialling programs have been proposed for novice sonographers; however, their feasibility has been questioned. We adopted the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) credentialling process for emergency ultrasound to determine whether it is feasible for emergency physicians in the Australasian environment.

METHODS

Three full-time emergency medicine specialists and a post-Fellowship Examination trainee at Auckland Hospital undertook the credentialling process.

RESULTS

All four participants had sufficient scans to complete the process after 16 months. Accuracy for focused assessment with sonography for trauma, 90% (95% CI 83-95%), and abdominal aortic aneurysm, 99% (95% CI 90-100%), is similar to that previously reported.

CONCLUSION

The ACEM credentialling process for focused assessment with sonography for trauma and abdominal aortic aneurysm is practical and achievable for emergency medicine specialists working in the Emergency Department at Auckland Hospital. Further studies are necessary to determine whether this holds true for other major trauma centres in Australasia.

Not so FAST

BACKGROUND

Focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) as a screening tool in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma will lead to underdiagnosis of abdominal injuries and may have an impact on treatment and outcome in trauma patients.

METHODS

From October 2001 to June 2002, a protocol for evaluating hemodynamically stable trauma patients with suspected blunt abdominal injury (BAI) admitted to our institution was implemented using FAST examination as a screening tool for BAI and computed tomographic (CT) scanning of the abdomen and pelvis as a confirmatory test. At the completion of the secondary survey, patients underwent a four-view FAST examination (Sonosite, Bothell, WA) followed within 1 hour by an abdominal/pelvic CT scan. The FAST examination was considered positive if it demonstrated evidence of free intra-abdominal fluid. Clinical, laboratory, and imaging results were recorded at admission, and FAST examination results were compared with CT scan findings, noting the discordance.

RESULTS

Patients with suspicion for BAI were evaluated according to protocol (n = 372). Thirteen cases were excluded for inadequate FAST examinations, leaving 359 patients for analysis. There were 313 true-negative FAST examinations, 16 true-positives, 22 false-negatives, and 8 false-positives. Using CT scanning as the confirmatory test for hemoperitoneum, FAST examination had a sensitivity of 42%, a specificity of 98%, a positive predictive value of 67%, a negative predictive value of 93%, and an accuracy of 92%; chi analysis showed significant discordance between FAST examination and CT scan (5.85%, < 0.001). Six patients with false-negative FAST examinations required laparotomy for intra-abdominal injuries; 16 patients required admission for nonoperative management of injury. Of the 313 true-negative FAST examinations, 19 patients were noted to have intra-abdominal injuries without hemoperitoneum and 11 patients were noted to have retroperitoneal injuries.

CONCLUSION

Use of FAST examination as a screening tool for BAI in the hemodynamically stable trauma patient results in underdiagnosis of intra-abdominal injury. This may have an impact on treatment and outcome in trauma patients. Hemodynamically stable patients with suspected BAI should undergo routine CT scanning.

Traumatic pneumothorax detection with thoracic US: correlation with chest radiography and CT--initial experience

PURPOSE

To prospectively compare the accuracy of ultrasonography (US) with that of supine chest radiography in the detection of traumatic pneumothoraces, with computed tomography (CT) as the reference standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thoracic US, supine chest radiography, and CT were performed to assess for pneumothorax in 27 patients who sustained blunt thoracic trauma. US and radiographic findings were compared with CT findings, the reference standard, for pneumothorax detection. For the purpose of this study, the sonographers were blinded to the radiographic and CT findings.

RESULTS

Eleven of 27 patients had pneumothorax at CT. All 11 of these pneumothoraces were detected at US, and four were seen at supine chest radiography. In the one false-positive US case, the patient was shown to have substantial bullous emphysema at CT. Sensitivity and negative predictive value of US were 100% (11 of 11 and 15 of 15 patients, respectively), specificity was 94% (15 of 16 patients), and positive predictive value was 92% (11 of 12 patients). Chest radiography had 36% (four of 11 patients) sensitivity, 100% (16 of 16 patients) specificity, a 100% (four of four patients) positive predictive value, and a 70% (16 of 23 patients) negative predictive value.

CONCLUSION

In this study, US was more sensitive than supine chest radiography and as sensitive as CT in the detection of traumatic pneumothoraces.

Current use and perceived utility of ultrasound for evaluation of pediatric compared with adult trauma patients

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the current use and perceived utility of ultrasound in the assessment of pediatric compared with adult trauma patients.

METHODS

A questionnaire was developed and mailed to 72 pediatric emergency physicians, 120 general emergency physicians, and 117 trauma attendings at 240 institutions.

RESULTS

Of 309 surveys, 234 (75%) were completed. Ultrasound was available to 169 of 234 (72%) of the physicians, and 122 of 169 (72%) were performing the Focused Assessment by Sonography for Trauma examination to evaluate trauma patients. Seventy-three percent (110/150) of general emergency and trauma surgeons reported that ultrasound was available equally with or more readily than computed tomography (CT) scan. Only 26% (5/19) of pediatric emergency attendings considered ultrasound equally available with CT scan, and none considered it more readily available than CT scan. Ninety-two percent (137/149) of general emergency and trauma attendings responding to the question about utility considered ultrasound somewhat useful to extremely useful for assessing adult trauma patients, and 77% considered it useful for pediatric patients. Only 57% (12/21) of pediatric emergency attendings responding to the same question perceived ultrasound as useful for pediatric trauma evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that ultrasound for the assessment of trauma patients is widely used by general emergency physicians and trauma surgeons, whereas pediatric emergency physicians report less use and perceived utility.

The hand-held FAST: experience with hand-held trauma sonography in a level-I urban trauma center

AIMS

To describe the effectiveness of a portable hand-held ultrasound machine when used by clinicians in the early evaluation and resuscitation of trauma victims.

METHODS

The study was a prospective evaluation in a level-I urban trauma center. The focussed assessment with sonography for trauma is a specifically defined examination for free fluid known as the focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) exam. Seventy-one patients had a hand-held FAST (HHFAST) examination performed with a Sonosite 180, 2.4 kg ultrasound machine. Sixty-seven examinations were immediately repeated with a Toshiba SSH 140A portable floor-based machine. This repeat scan (formal FAST or FFAST) was used as a comparison standard between the devices for study purposes. Four patients had a HHFAST only, all with positive result, two being taken for immediate laparotomy, and two having a follow-up computed tomographic (CT) scan. Patient follow-up from other imaging studies, operative intervention, and clinical outcomes were also compared to the performance of each device.

RESULTS

There were 58 victims of blunt, and 13 of penetrating abdominal trauma. One examination was indeterminate using both machines. The apparent HHFAST performance yielded; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictable value, and accuracy (S, S, PPV, NPV, A) of 83, 100, 100, 98, 98%. Upon review, a CT scan finding and benign clinical course found the HHFAST diagnosis to be correct rather than the FFAST in one case. Considering the ultimate clinical course of the patients, yielded a (S, S, PPV, NPV, A) of 78, 100, 100, 97, and 97% for the HHFAST and 75, 98, 86, 97, and 96% for the FFAST. Statistically, there was no significant difference in the actual performance of the HHFAST compared to the FFAST in this clinical setting.

DISCUSSION

Hand-held portable sonography can simplify early and accurate performance of FAST exams in victims of abdominal trauma.

Does the presence of ultrasound really affect computed tomographic scan use? A prospective randomized trial of ultrasound in trauma

OBJECTIVE

There is a paucity of evidence demonstrating that emergency department (ED) ultrasound changes clinical practice in trauma patients. We hypothesized that the presence of ultrasound would affect clinical decision making as evidenced through abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scan use in blunt multiple trauma patients.

METHODS

This study used a prospective randomized format in an urban county ED with Level II trauma center status (ED census, 72,000 patients per year). Participants were patients with multiple blunt injuries meeting trauma center triage criteria. Patients were randomized to receive either abdominal ultrasound or no ultrasound (control) during initial ED resuscitation. The primary outcome variable was use of abdominal CT scan in patients with and without ultrasound.

RESULTS

Two hundred eight patients were enrolled. The mean age was 40 +/- 18 years, and 62% were men. Mechanism of injury was motor vehicle crash, 56%; automobile versus pedestrian, 18%; motorcycle crash, 16%; falls, 10%; and other, 10%. One hundred four ultrasound and 104 control patients were analyzed. There were no apparent differences between ultrasound and control groups in demographics, injury type, or Injury Severity Score. Fifty-four of 104 (52%) of the control group received abdominal CT scans versus 37 of 104 (36%) abdominal CT scans for the ultrasound group; mean difference in proportions was 15.9 (p < 0.01; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-29.1).

CONCLUSION

In this trial, the routine use of abdominal ultrasound in the evaluation of patients with multiple blunt injuries resulted in significantly fewer abdominal CT scans being obtained. A larger trial is needed to more clearly define the clinical and financial impact of ultrasound in the management of blunt abdominal trauma.

The routine use of sonography in penetrating torso injury is beneficial

BACKGROUND

Torso sonography (focused assessment with sonography for trauma [FAST]) has been added to our protocols for the evaluation of penetrating torso injury. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our recent experience and determine whether the use of FAST is beneficial.

METHODS

From January 1999 to January 2000, patients with penetrating torso injury and no clinical indication for surgery were evaluated by sonography with a selective use of other investigations. FAST consisted of sonographic views of the peritoneum and/or pericardium to determine the presence or absence of fluid.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 238 victims of penetrating injury assessed by our trauma service, and sonography was performed in 72 (30%) patients as per our protocols. There were 31 stab, 37 gunshot/shotgun and, and 4 puncture wounds. Thirty-eight patients had peritoneal views, 6 patients had pericardial views, and 28 patients had both pericardial and peritoneal views obtained. Thirteen of 66 patients had free fluid in the peritoneal cavity and 12 of the 13 patients had a therapeutic laparotomy. No peritoneal fluid was seen in 53 of 66 patients, of whom 6 had abdominal injuries, 5 requiring surgery for diaphragm or bowel injuries. The sensitivity of FAST alone for abdominal injury was 67%, specificity was 98%, positive predictive value was 92%, and negative predictive value was 89%. Pericardial fluid was seen in 3 of 34 patients; one had a heart wound and two had negative pericardial windows. All 31 patients without pericardial fluid recovered without surgery.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of sonography in penetrating torso injury is beneficial. The detection of pericardial or peritoneal fluid is clinically useful. However, a negative FAST examination does not exclude abdominal injury, such as a diaphragm or hollow viscus wound, and further investigation or close follow-up is required.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of emergency ultrasonography for blunt abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

How precise and reliable is ultrasonography as a primary tool for injury assessment in blunt abdominal trauma?

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted of prospective clinical trials of ultrasonography for blunt abdominal trauma. Publications were retrieved by structured searching among databases, review articles and major text books. Authors and experts in the field were contacted for original and unpublished data. For statistical analysis, summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROCs) were computed using weighted and robust regression models, with Q* denoting the shoulder of the curve. Post-test probabilities were calculated as a function of pooled likelihood ratios (LRs).

RESULTS

Thirty of 123 trials enrolling 9047 patients were eligible for final analysis. With respect to targeting organ lesions, ultrasonography showed a summary Q* value of 0.91 (inverse variance weights, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.76-1.07); negative predictive values ranged from 0.72 to 0.99. A similar SROC slope was calculated for screening for free fluid (Q* = 0.89 (95 per cent c.i. 0.73-1.05)). Ultrasonography detects the presence of organ lesions, but fails to exclude abdominal injuries (random effects negative LR 0.23 (95 per cent c.i. 0.18-0.28)). Given a pretest probability of 50 per cent for blunt abdominal injury, a post-test probability of nearly 25 per cent remains in the case of a negative sonogram.

CONCLUSION

Despite its high specificity, ultrasonography has an unexpectedly low sensitivity for the detection of both free fluid and organ lesions. In clinically suspected abdominal trauma, another assessment (e.g. helical computed tomography) must be performed regardless of the initial ultrasonographic findings.

Fast education: a comparison of teaching models for trauma sonography

This study's objective was to evaluate the peritoneal dialysis and mannequin simulator models for the hands-on portion of a 4-h focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) course. After an introductory lecture about trauma sonography and practice on normal models, trainees were assigned randomly to two groups. They practiced FAST on one of the two simulator models. After the didactic and hands-on portions of the seminar, FAST interpretation testing revealed mean scores of 82% and 78% for the peritoneal dialysis and mannequin simulator groups, respectively (p = 0.95). Post-course surveys demonstrated mean satisfaction scores for peritoneal dialysis and mannequin simulator models of 3.85 and 3.25, respectively, on a 4-point Likert scale (p = 0.317). A FAST educational seminar, which provides both didactic and hands-on instruction, can be completed in 4 h; the hands-on instruction phase can incorporate both normal models and abnormal simulation models, such as the peritoneal dialysis model and the multimedia mannequin simulator.

Role of ultrasonography in penetrating abdominal trauma: a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) is rapidly establishing its place in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma. However, no prospective study specifically evaluates its role in penetrating abdominal trauma.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively in 75 consecutive stable patients with penetrating trauma to the abdomen, flank, or back, from December 1998 to June 1999. Those with an obvious need for emergent laparotomy were excluded. FAST was performed as the initial diagnostic study on all patients. Wound location, type of weapon, and findings of diagnostic peritoneal lavage, triple-contrast computed tomographic scan, or laparotomy were recorded. The presence of peritoneal blood was noted. Data were analyzed using the chi(2) test.

RESULTS

Of the 75 patients, there were 32 stab and 43 gunshot wounds. There were 66 male patients and 9 female patients; the mean age was 30 years; 41 had proven abdominal injury and 34 had no injury; and 21 patients had a positive FAST. Nineteen had peritoneal blood and injuries requiring repair at the time of laparotomy. There were two false-positive studies. Fifty-four patients had a negative FAST. In 32 patients, this was a true-negative study. Thirteen patients had a false-negative FAST and had peritoneal blood and significant injury on further evaluation. Nine patients had a negative FAST and no peritoneal blood but still had abdominal injuries requiring operative repair, including liver (four), small bowel (four), diaphragm (three), colon (three), and stomach (one). The overall sensitivity of FAST was 46% and the specificity was 94%. The positive predictive value was 90%, and the negative predictive value was 60%.

CONCLUSION

FAST can be a useful initial diagnostic study after penetrating abdominal trauma. A positive FAST is a strong predictor of injury, and patients should proceed directly to laparotomy. If negative, additional diagnostic studies should be performed to rule out occult injury.

Management of traumatically injured patients in the emergency department observation unit

An EDOU may be an ideal setting for the short-term monitoring and treatment of certain acutely injured patients. The patients choosen for observation, and the diagnostic studies used, will be specific to a particular institution's availability and expertise. Pathways should be developed in conjunction with all services caring for these patients.

Evolution in the treatment of complex blunt liver injuries

Over the last decade, major changes in the treatment of patients with blunt liver injuries have occurred, specifically with the nonoperative treatment of more complex injuries. These major changes can be summarized as follows: 1. Patients with blunt liver injuries are screened expeditiously by surgeon-performed ultrasonography. Depending on the initial findings and response to resuscitation, further decisions are made regarding the further evaluation. 2. Computed tomographic scanning is the mainstay of diagnosis for hepatic injuries after blunt trauma; the initial CT findings will help the trauma surgeon to determine the nonoperative treatment. 3. Liver injuries of grades I through III can be observed safely in a monitored unit and not necessarily in an ICU setting. Patients with injuries of grades IV and V are best initially observed in an ICU. 4. More than two thirds of patients with injuries of grades IV and V can be treated nonoperatively. However, 50% of these patients will require some type of interventional treatment, but not necessarily a laparotomy. 5. Initial findings on the CT scan can help to identify those patients who will need some type of interventional treatment and to identify associated injuries. 6. Elderly patients or patients with associated medical comorbidities can also be treated nonoperatively if strict guidelines are followed. 7. Complications in patients with complex blunt liver injuries are not uncommon. However, most of the complications can be safely treated by less invasive procedures.

Utilization of FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma) in 1999: Results of a Survey of North American Trauma Centers

Although much has been written about FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma) in the last decade little is known about its present clinical utilization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and characterize the contemporary utilization of FAST at trauma centers in the United States and Canada. In 1999 trauma directors or their delegates at Level I regional trauma centers in the United States and Canada were surveyed either by fax or phone regarding the present utilization and the future of FAST at their center. The overall survey response rate was 91 per cent with 96 of 105 centers completing the survey. Of the 96 centers surveyed 78 were in the United States and 18 were in Canada. Of the 78 U.S. centers surveyed 62 (79%) routinely use FAST, and it is done by surgeons in 39 per cent, surgeons and emergency departments in 21 per cent, emergency departments in 5 per cent, and radiologists in 35 per cent. Most centers (79%) thought that it sped up their workups, and 89 per cent said it was an advance in patient care. FAST is used in penetrating injury at 58 per cent of centers, and some centers use FAST to assess organ injury. The utilization of diagnostic peritoneal lavage and CT has markedly decreased at many centers. Almost all respondents thought that FAST should be a component of surgery resident training. The utilization of FAST is significantly less in Canada than in the United States ( P < 0.05). Our conclusions are the following. FAST has become routinely used at the majority of the U.S. centers surveyed. FAST is performed by clinicians at 65 per cent of the trauma centers surveyed. The utilization of CT and diagnostic peritoneal lavage has changed. Many centers have broadened the scope of FAST to include the assessment of organ, pediatric, and penetrating injury.

The focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) examination: considerations and recommendations for training physicians in the use of a new clinical tool

Focused abdominal sonography for trauma (FAST) is being used by growing numbers of emergency physicians and surgeons because it has proven to be an accurate, rapid, and repeatable bedside test for evaluating abdominal trauma victims. Controversy exists about the optimal means of FAST education and the number of examinations necessary to demonstrate competency. Most FAST educators agree that FAST education should consist of three phases: didactic, practical, and experiential. This article summarizes options and preliminary recommendations suitable for developing a FAST curriculum.

Robotics and telecommunication systems to provide better access to ultrasound expertise in the OR

Surgery has begun to evolve as a result of the intense use of technological innovations. The result of this is better services for patients and enormous opportunities for the producers of biomedical instruments. The surgeon and the technologist are fast becoming allies in applying the latest developments of robotics, image treatment, simulation, sensors and telecommunications to surgery, in particular to the emerging field of minimally-invasive surgery. Ultrasonography is at present utilised both for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in various fields. Intraoperative US examination can be of primary importance, especially when dealing with space-occupying lesions. The widening use of minimally-invasive surgery has furthered the development of US for use during this type of surgery. The success of a US examination requires not only a correct execution of the procedure, but also a correct interpretation of the images. We describe two projects that combine robotics and telecommunication systems to provide better access to US expertise in the operating room. The Midstep project has as its object the realisation of two robotic arms, one for the distant control of the US probe during laparoscopic surgery and the second to perform tele-interventional US. The second project, part of the Strategic CNR Project-'Robotics in Surgery', involves the realisation of a common platform for tracking and targeting surgical instruments in video-assisted surgery.

Transthoracic ultrasonography is an alternative to subxyphoid ultrasonography for the diagnosis of hemopericardium in penetrating precordial trauma

BACKGROUND

Surgeon-performed ultrasonography is increasingly becoming part of the initial evaluation of patients after blunt or penetrating trauma. Currently, most institutions obtain a subxyphoid or subcostal view of the heart and pericardial space, and a three-view ultrasonogram of the abdomen to detect blood in the pericardial sac or in three dependent abdominal areas.

METHODS

A left parastemal standard transverse transthoracic view is described in addition to the aforementioned views. This facilitates the visualization of the pericardial sac when a subxyphoid or subcostal view cannot be obtained because of anatomical reasons (narrow subxyphoid space) or local factors (pain, fractures, subcutaneous emphysema, or chest wall contusion).

RESULTS

The transthoracic view can be useful in patients where the subxyphoid view is difficult to obtain through the conventional approach. In most patients an excellent view of the pericardial sac and ventricles can be obtained and, therefore, expedites the diagnosis and treatment of patients with hemopericardium.

CONCLUSION

Surgeon-performed ultrasonography has become the diagnostic test of choice for patients suspected of having hemopericardium and cardiac tamponade. Transthoracic ultrasonography is an excellent alternative for those patients where a subxyphoid or subcostal view to visualize the pericardial sac and heart cannot be obtained owing to local or anatomical factors.

Sonographic assessment of traumatic injury. Future developments

In all its forms and applications, sonography plays a significant role in the management of injured patients, from the emergency department to beyond hospital discharge. The use of new and existing sonographic technology will increase because sonographic imaging and measurements are generally less invasive; are inexpensive; use no ionizing radiation; and are portable, repeatable, and, in many instances, as accurate as the so-called "contemporary gold standards." The training and credentialing of physicians in sonography is in evolution and will be an increasingly important issue with more widespread use and broader applications. The future of sonography in trauma care in the next millennium is bright, and surgeons and surgical residents are encouraged to gain proficiency and learn about this new surgical frontier as it evolves.

Prospective evidence of the superiority of a sonography-based algorithm in the assessment of blunt abdominal injury

BACKGROUND

Although the routine use of FAST (focused assessment with sonography for trauma) in the evaluation of trauma victims is increasing, to our knowledge, a prospective comparison of contemporary adult trauma victims managed with and without FAST has not been reported in North America.

METHODS

Adult victims of blunt trauma for whom there was a suspicion of abdominal injury were managed with one of two diagnostic algorithms, FAST or no-FAST. The two algorithms were compared for diagnostic accuracy, cost, time, and delayed diagnoses.

RESULTS

Among 706 patients (mean Injury Severity Score, 23), 460 were managed with FAST and 246 with no-FAST. The two groups were similar with respect to age, Injury Severity Score, prehospital time, and mortality (p = not significant). There were 3 of 460 (0.7%) delayed diagnoses in the FAST group and 4 of 246 (1.6%) in the no-FAST group (p = not significant). The diagnostic accuracy for the FAST and no-FAST algorithms was 99% and 98%, respectfully. The FAST and no-FAST algorithms led to similar rates of laparotomy, 13% and 14%, respectfully, but nonoperative management was more common in the no-FAST group (p < 0.01). The mean diagnostic cost for the FAST algorithm was $156, compared with $540 with the no-FAST algorithm (p < 0.0001) and the mean time required for diagnostic work-up was 53 minutes with the FAST algorithm, compared with 151 minutes with the no-FAST algorithm (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study has provided prospective evidence that a FAST-based algorithm for blunt abdominal injury was more rapid, less expensive, and as accurate as an algorithm that used computed tomography or diagnostic peritoneal lavage only. Trauma centers are encouraged to incorporate a FAST-based algorithm into their initial management of blunt trauma victims.