Cervical spine evaluation and clearance in the intoxicated patient: A prospective Western Trauma Association Multi-Institutional Trial and Survey

Approaches and reporting of alcohol and other drug testing for injured patients in hospital-based studies: A systematic review

ISSUE

Hospital alcohol and/or other drug (AOD) testing is important for identifying AOD-related injuries; however, testing methods vary. This systematic review aimed to examine biological AOD testing methods from hospital-based studies of injured patients and quantify what proportion reported key information on those testing methods.

APPROACH

Observational studies published in English from 2010 onwards involving biological AOD testing for injured patients presenting to hospital were included. Studies examining single injury causes were excluded. Extracted data included concentration thresholds for AOD detection (e.g., lower limits of detection, author-defined cut-offs), test type (e.g., immunoassay, breathalyser) and approach (e.g., routine, clinical discretion), timing of testing, sample type and the proportion of injured cases tested for AODs.

KEY FINDINGS

Of 83 included studies, 76 measured alcohol and 37 other drugs. Forty-nine studies defined blood alcohol concentration thresholds (ranging from 0 to 0.1 g/100 mL). Seven studies defined concentration thresholds for other drugs. Testing approach was reported in 39/76 alcohol and 18/37 other drug studies. Sample type was commonly reported (alcohol: n = 69/76; other drugs: n = 28/37); alcohol was typically measured using blood (n = 60) and other drugs using urine (n = 20). Studies that reported the proportion of cases tested (alcohol: n = 53/76; other drugs: n = 28/37), reported that between 0% and 89% of cases were not tested for alcohol and 0% and 91% for other drugs. Timing of testing was often unreported (alcohol: n = 61; other drugs: n = 30).

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Variation in AOD testing methods alongside incomplete reporting of those methods limits data comparability and interpretation. Standardised reporting of testing methods will assist AOD-related injury surveillance and prevention.

Outcome and complications of operatively treated subaxial cervical spine injuries: A population-based retrospective cohort study

Objective

The aim was to study the outcome and complications of operative treatment for subaxial cervical spine injuries with respect to injury morphology and surgical strategy.

Methods

A population-based cohort of 271 consecutive patients treated at Kuopio University Hospital from 2003 to 2018 was retrospectively reviewed.

Results

The mean age was 52.4 (range 12-90) years and 78.6% were male. The AOSpine morphological classification was C in 56.5%, B in 24.7% and A in 17.0% of cases. The surgical approach was anterior in 70.8%, posterior in 20.3% and combined in 8.9% of patients. Fixation alignment was maintained in 96.9% of patients. Instrumentation failures were observed only in patients operated anteriorly but no statistical difference was found between the surgical approaches. The American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade improved in 22.1% of patients. Patients with preoperative AIS grade C had significant potential for neurological improvement (OR 10.44; 95% CI 1.77-61.56; p = 0.010). Postoperative, mostly mild, complications manifested in 22.5% of patients. The posterior approach was associated with fewer postoperative complications (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.51; p = 0.001). Preoperative AIS grade A was a significant predisposing factor for complications (OR = 4.90; 95% CI = 1.49-16.10; p = 0.009). The perioperative (90-day) mortality rate was 3.3%. The mean follow-up period was 64.7 ± 25.9 (radiological)/136.7 ± 174.8 (clinical) days.

Conclusions

Operative treatment is safe and effective but the surgical approach should be patient- and injury-specific. The prognosis for neurological recovery from spinal cord injury is superior in patients with partially preserved motor function.

Rethinking cervical spine clearance in obtunded trauma patients: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical spine injuries (CSI) are often challenging to diagnose in obtunded adult patients with blunt trauma and the optimal imaging modality remains uncertain. This study systematically synthesized the last decade of evidence to determine the type of imaging required to clear the c-spine in obtunded patients with blunt trauma.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted and reported using PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The protocol was registered on June 22, 2022 (PROSPERO CRD42022341386). MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 1, 2012, and October 17, 2023. Studies comparing CT alone to CT combined with MRI for c-spine clearance were included. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility in duplicate. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effect model. Risk of bias and quality assessment were performed using the ROBINS-I and QUADAS-2. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

744 obtunded trauma patients from six included studies were included. Among the 584 that had a negative CT scan, the pooled missed rate of clinically significant CSI using CT scans alone was 6 % (95 % CI: 0.02 to 0.17), and the pooled missed rate of CSI requiring treatment was 7 % (95 % CI: 0.02 to 0.18). High heterogeneity was observed among included studies (I² > 84 %). The overall risk of bias was moderate, and the quality of evidence was low due to the retrospective nature of the included studies and high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence published in the last decade found that CT scans alone may not be sufficient for detecting clinically significant CSI and injuries requiring treatment in obtunded adult patients with blunt trauma.

IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of CT scans and consider using MRI when appropriate. Future research should focus on prospective studies with standardized outcome measures and uniform reporting.

Prevalence of Alcohol and Other Drug Use in Patients Presenting to Hospital for Violence-Related Injuries: A Systematic Review

Substance use is a risk factor for being both a perpetrator and a victim of violence. The aim of this systematic review was to report the prevalence of acute pre-injury substance use in patients with violence-related injuries. Systematic searches were used to identify observational studies that included patients aged ≥15 years presenting to hospital after violence-related injuries and used objective toxicology measures to report prevalence of acute pre-injury substance use. Studies were grouped based on injury cause (any violence-related, assault, firearm, and other penetrating injuries including stab and incised wounds) and substance type (any substance, alcohol only, drugs other than alcohol only), and they were summarized using narrative synthesis and meta-analyses. This review included 28 studies. Alcohol was detected in 13%-66% of any violence-related injuries (five studies), 4%-71% of assaults (13 studies), 21%-45% of firearm injuries (six studies; pooled estimate = 41%, 95% CI: 40%-42%, n = 9,190), and 9%-66% of other penetrating injuries (nine studies; pooled estimate = 60%, 95% CI: 56%-64%, n = 6,950). Drugs other than alcohol were detected in 37% of any violence-related injuries (one study), 39% of firearm injuries (one study), 7%-49% of assaults (five studies), and 5%-66% of penetrating injuries (three studies). The prevalence of any substance varied across injury categories: any violence-related injuries = 76%-77% (three studies), assaults = 40%-73% (six studies), firearms = n/a, other penetrating injuries = 26%-45% (four studies; pooled estimate = 30%, 95% CI: 24%-37%, n = 319).Overall, substance use was frequently detected in patients presenting to hospital for violence-related injuries. Quantification of substance use in violence-related injuries provides a benchmark for harm reduction and injury prevention strategies.

Intensive Care Physician-Led Clearance of the Cervical Spine: A Retrospective Review of the Utility of a Normal Cervical CT Scan for Safe Removal of Hard Collars by Critical Care Physicians

Background: Cervical spine clearance in intubated patients due to blunt trauma remains contentious. Accumulating evidence suggests that a normal computed tomography (CT) cervical spine can be used to clear the cervical spine and remove the collar in unconscious patients presenting to the emergency department. However, whether this strategy can safely be employed by critical care physicians with intubated patients admitted to the trauma intensive care unit (TICU) with cervical collars in situ, has not been definitively studied. Methods: A retrospective review of 730 intubated victims of trauma who presented to the Level 1 Trauma center of a tertiary hospital was conducted. The rates of missed cervical injuries in patients who had their cervical collars removed by intensive care physicians based on a normal CT scan of the cervical spine, were reviewed. Secondary outcomes included rates of collar-related complications. Results: Three hundred and fifty patients had their cervical collars removed by Trauma ICU doctors based on a high-quality, radiologist-interpreted normal CT cervical spine. Seventy percent of patients were sedated and/or comatose at the time of collar removal. Fifty-one percent of patients had concomitant traumatic brain injury. The average GCS at time of collar removal was 9. The incidence of missed neurological injury discerned clinically at time of both ICU and hospital discharge was nil (negative predictive value 100%). The rate of collar-related complications was 2%. Conclusion: Cervical collar removal by intensive care physicians on TICU following normal CT cervical spine, is safe, provided certain quality conditions related to the CT scan are met. Not removing the collar early may be associated with increased complications. An algorithm is suggested to assist critical care decision-making in this patient cohort.

Frequency and Outcomes of Cervical Spine Computed Tomography Imaging on Alcohol-Intoxicated Patients in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Cervical spinal (c-spine) injuries range greatly in severity from minor ligamentous injuries to osteoligamentous instability with spinal cord injuries. Initial evaluation begins with stabilization as needed and immediate immobilization. Current practice as to whether the c-spine can be cleared clinically without radiographic evaluation is often guided by using the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study Low-Risk Criteria and the Canadian C-Spine Rule. Under these clinical decision guidelines, stable trauma patients presenting with alcohol intoxication cannot have the c-spine cleared clinically and imaging should be "considered."

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the frequency of computed tomography (CT) c-spine scans ordered for patients presenting with alcohol intoxication to the emergency department (ED), the timing of the studies, and subsequently determine the proportion of which showed a clinically significant result that required intervention.

METHODS

In this retrospective medical record review, all clinically alcohol-intoxicated patients presenting to two academic EDs were included. Overall demographic characteristics, time to order of CT imaging, radiology reads, and outcomes of patient visits were determined.

RESULTS

There were 8008 patient visits included in the study. Of these visits, 5 patients scanned in ≤3 h had acute findings on CT scan and no patients with a deferred timing of CT scan after patients metabolized had an acute finding on CT scan. No patients required operative management.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's results suggest that it is a safe clinical practice to defer CT imaging for patients presenting to the ED with alcohol intoxication and low suspicion for c-spine injury per history and examination.

Prevalence of alcohol and other drug use in patients presenting to hospital for fall-related injuries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Alcohol and other drug (AOD) use is a key preventable risk factor for serious injuries. Prevention strategies to date have largely focused on transport injuries, despite AOD use being a significant risk factor for other injury causes, including falls. This systematic review aimed to report the prevalence of AOD use in patients presenting to hospital for fall-related injuries.

METHODS

This systematic review includes studies published in English after the year 2010 that objectively measured the prevalence of AOD use in patients presenting to hospital for a fall-related injury. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were completed by two independent reviewers. Data were presented using narrative synthesis and, where appropriate, meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 12 707 records were screened. Full texts were retrieved for 2042 records, of which 29 were included. Four studies reported the combined prevalence of any alcohol and/or drug use, generating a pooled prevalence estimate of 37% (95% CI 25% to 49%). Twenty-two records reported on the prevalence of acute alcohol use alone and nine reported specifically on the prevalence of drugs other than alcohol, with prevalence ranging from 2% to 57% and 7% to 46%, respectively. The variation in prevalence estimates likely resulted from differences in toxicology testing methods across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

AOD exposure was common in hospitalised fall-related injuries. However, research addressing prevalence across different types of falls and the use of drugs other than alcohol was limited. Future research should address these areas to improve our understanding of which populations should be targeted in AOD and injury prevention strategies .

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020188746.

The Effect of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Guideline on Spinal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Use in Obtunded Adult Blunt Trauma Patients Over Time

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based guidelines suggest computed tomography without magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is sufficient to rule out clinically significant cervical spine injury in obtunded adult blunt trauma patients. This study evaluated MRI utilization over time to investigate the impact of the 2015 Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines suggesting cervical collar clearance with computed tomography alone in this population. We hypothesized that MRI utilization would decrease following the guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2018 using multivariable logistic regression of the likelihood of spinal MRI utilization. Blunt trauma patients 18 y and older with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 8 or less, Abbreviated Injury Score head of 4 or greater, intubated for at least 72 h were included.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 76,450 patients from 567 trauma centers. Controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, insurance status, injury mechanism, Injury Severity Score, GCS, GCS motor, hospital teaching status and trauma center level, patients seen after 2015 had a higher odds ratio (OR) of undergoing spinal MRI relative to those seen before 2015 (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.49-2.09; P < 0.001). Each year was associated with a significantly increased OR of undergoing spinal MRI compared to the year prior (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal MRI use has been increasing in obtunded adult blunt trauma patients including after the release of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines in 2015. Future work should identify whether this is driven by improper MRI utilization and, if so, strategies to promote guideline adherence.

Missed cervical spine subluxation leading to bilateral facet dislocation with severe deformity requiring 360 fixation

A 41 year-old male that presented after a fall downstairs and the initial imaging was misinterpreted, missing a subtle abnormality, C5/6 subluxation. The patient presented later with neck pain and further imaging demonstrated bilateral facet dislocation with severe deformity requiring 360 spinal fixation.

Utilization of computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of traumatic C-Spine injuries at a level 1 trauma center: A retrospective Cohort analysis

Background

Computerized tomography (CT) is a common imaging modality for trauma patients, but there is debate regarding the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in cervical (C)-spine clearance. We aim to investigate the utilization of CT and MRI imaging in traumatic C-spine clearance and associated outcomes on patients who undergo both imaging modalities.

Methods

A 4-year retrospective review was performed to evaluate the trauma patient imaging algorithm at our institution. The algorithm required CT as a screening examination for traumatic injury patients who are unexaminable because of distracting injury, altered mental status, an abnormal neurological examination, and/or central neck pain. MRI was performed after CT in patients with C-spine injuries identified on CT, those who remained unexaminable, had an abnormal neurological examination, or experienced persistent central neck tenderness. Univariate analyses and adjusted multivariate logistic regression were performed with significance defined as p < 0.05.

Results

805 patients were analyzed. Compared to MRI, CT had a sensitivity of 50.2%, specificity of 76.6%, positive predictive value of 69.7%, and negative predictive value of 59.0% in detecting C-spine injuries. CT and MRI differed significantly in their ability to detect C-spine soft tissue injuries and C1 vertebral fractures (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

MRI is more capable of detecting soft tissue injuries whereas CT is superior in detecting vertebral fractures. Our findings support the need to utilize CT and MRI in conjunction to detect both bony and soft tissue C-spine injuries in traumatically injured patients, who are either unexaminable, have an abnormal neurologic examination, or ongoing central neck tenderness.

Cervical Spine Clearance in Trauma Patients with an Unreliable Physical Examination

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to describe and compare the timing of cervical spine clearance in trauma patients with an unreliable physical examination.

METHODS

We prospectively included adult trauma patients admitted with a cervical collar and an unreliable clinical examination (as defined by the NEXUS criteria) at two level 1 trauma centers: one in the USA (US) and one in Denmark (DK). We excluded patients with cervical spine injuries requiring a collar or surgery as treatment and patients with a collar placed after hospital arrival. The primary outcome was time from emergency department (ED) arrival to collar removal. Secondary outcomes included time to CT of the cervical spine (CTCS). At the US trauma center, an institutional protocol allowing cervical spine clearance exclusively by CTCS was in place. At the Danish trauma center, cervical spine clearance was based on a clinical evaluation by an orthopedic surgeon, usually after CTCS.

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients were included (US: n = 56; DK: n = 57). The median age was 47 years, and 68% were males. The main reasons for an unreliable physical examination were a Glasgow Coma Scale score below 14 (35%), distracting injuries (26%), cervical spine tenderness (13%) and intoxication (13%). The injury severity score at the US trauma center was higher than at the DK trauma center (median: 17 vs. 11, p = 0.03). Both time to CTCS (median: 41 vs. 18 min, p < 0.0001) and time to collar removal (median: 1042 vs. 49 min, p < 0.0001) were significantly greater at the US trauma center.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to collar removal was significantly greater in a trauma center utilizing a cervical spine clearance protocol based on CTCS. As patients may develop complications related to the collar, future studies should clarify how early removal can be implemented without increasing the risk of morbidity.

Is magnetic resonance imaging becoming the new computed tomography for cervical spine clearance? Trends in magnetic resonance imaging utilization at a Level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence supports the limited use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for cervical spine (C-spine) clearance following blunt trauma. We sought to characterize the utilization of MRI of the C-spine at a Level I trauma center.

METHODS

All blunt trauma patients undergoing a computed tomography (CT) of the C-spine between January 2009 and December 2018 were reviewed. The CT and MRI results, demographics, clinical presentation, subspecialty consultations, and interventions were recorded. The MRI results were considered clinically significant if they resulted in cervical thoracic orthosis/halo placement or surgical intervention. Linear regression models were utilized to identify trends.

RESULTS

There were 9,101 patients that underwent a CT of the C-spine, with 513 (5.6%) being positive for an acute injury. MRI was obtained for 375 (4.1%) of patients. A linear increase in the proportion of patients undergoing an MRI was noted, from 0.9% in 2009 to 5.6% in 2018 (p < 0.01). Of the 513 patients with a positive CT, 290 (56.5%) had an MRI. In 40 (13.8%) of them, the CT demonstrated a minor injury. Clinically significant MRI findings were noted only in two (5.0%) of the 40 patients, and both had a neurologic deficit on initial examination. Of the 8,588 patients with a negative CT, 85 (1.0%) underwent an MRI. Of those, 9 (10.6%) had a clinically significant MRI with all but one presenting with a neurological deficit.

CONCLUSION

MRI is increasingly utilized for C-spine clearance following blunt trauma. MRI was exceedingly unlikely to demonstrate a clinically significant finding in the absence of a neurological deficit, when the CT was negative or included minor injuries. Trauma centers are encouraged to constantly evaluate their own practices and intervene with education and collaboration to limit the excessive use of unnecessary resources.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management Study, Level III or IV. Diagnostic test, level IV.

Cervical spine clearance after blunt trauma: current state of the art

No definite consensus exists for the clearance of the cervical spine (C-spine) after blunt trauma, despite many validated algorithms, recommendations and guidelines. We intend to answer the most relevant questions with which physicians are confronted when clearing C-spines after blunt trauma in emergency departments (EDs). To exclude significant C-spine injuries we designed an algorithm to be compatible with clinical practice, to simplify patient management and avoid unrewarding evaluation.

We conducted an exploratory PubMed search including articles published from January 2000 to October 2018. Keywords used were “cervical spine”, “injury”, “clearance”, “Canadian C-spine Rule”, “CCR” and “national emergency x-radiography utilization study”. Clinical and experimental studies were included in a detailed review.

We based our literature review on 33 articles. While answering fundamental triage questions from daily clinical practice, the current literature is discussed in detail. We designed an algorithm for the C-spine clearance suitable for any trauma centre with a high-quality multiplanar reconstruction computerized tomography (CT) scan continuously available.

The high sensitivity of the Canadian C-spine Rule (CCR) prevents missing C-spine injuries while limiting the amount of unnecessary radiologic examinations. Plain radiographs were fully abandoned for C-spine clearance. A negative CT scan is sufficient to clear the majority of C-spine injuries and allows for collar removal. In case of motor symptoms or radio-clinical discrepancy, the advice of a specialized spine surgeon must be requested. Magnetic resonance imaging must not be routinely used. Neck pain despite negative imaging is not a reason to delay removal of stiff cervical collars.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:253-259. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190047

New clinical guidelines on the spinal stabilisation of adult trauma patients - consensus and evidence based

Traumatic spinal cord injury is a relatively rare injury in Denmark but may result in serious neurological consequences. For decades, prehospital spinal stabilisation with a rigid cervical collar and a hard backboard has been considered to be the most appropriate procedure to prevent secondary spinal cord injuries during patient transportation. However, the procedure has been questioned in recent years, due to the lack of high-quality studies supporting its efficacy. A national interdisciplinary task force was therefore established to provide updated clinical guidelines on prehospital procedures for spinal stabilisation of adult trauma patients in Denmark. The guidelines are based on a systematic review of the literature and grading of the evidence, in addition to a standardised consensus process.This process yielded five main recommendations:A strong recommendation against spinal stabilisation of patients with isolated penetrating trauma; a weak recommendation against the prehospital use of a rigid cervical collar and a hard backboard for ABCDE-stable patients; and a weak recommendation for the use of a vacuum mattress for patient transportation. Finally, our group recommends the use of our clinical algorithm to ensure good clinical practice.

Is clinician assessment accurate or is routine pan-body CT needed in the stable intoxicated trauma patient?

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine if clinician suspicion of injury was useful in predicting injuries found on pan-body computed tomography (PBCT) in clinically intoxicated patients.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled awake, intoxicated patients with low-energy mechanism of injury. For each of four body regions (head/face, neck, thorax and abdomen/pelvis), clinician suspicion for injury was recorded as "low index" or "more than a low index". The reference standard was the presence of any pre-defined significant finding (SF) on CT. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

Enrollment of 103 patients was completed. Sensitivity, specificity, LR+ and LR-for clinician index of suspicion were: 56%, 68%, 1.75, 0.64 (head/face), 50%, 92%, 6.18, 0.54 (neck), 10%, 96%, 2.60, 0.94 (thorax) and 67%, 93%, 9.56, 0.36 (abdomen/pelvis).

CONCLUSION

Clinician judgement was most useful to guide need for CT imaging in the neck and abdomen/pelvis. Routine PBCT may not be necessary.

SUMMARY

For awake, stable intoxicated patients after falls and assaults, clinician index of suspicion was most useful to guide the need for CT imaging in the neck and abdomen/pelvis. Our findings support selective use of CT if the index of suspicion is low. Routine PBCT may not be necessary.

Variation in the use of MRI for cervical spine clearance: an opportunity to simultaneously improve clinical care and decrease cost

Background

For years, controversy has existed about the ideal approach for cervical spine clearance in obtunded, blunt trauma patients. However, recent national guidelines suggest that MRI is not necessary for collar clearance in these patients. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent of national variation in the use of MRI and assess patient-specific and hospital-specific factors associated with the practice.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2012. We included blunt trauma patients aged ≥18 years, admitted to level 1 or 2 trauma centers (TCs), with a Glasgow Coma Scale <8, Abbreviated Injury Scale >3 for the head and mechanically ventilated for more than 72 hours. Multilevel modeling was used to identify patient-level and hospital-level factors associated with spine MRI use.

Results

32 125 obtunded, blunt trauma patients treated at 395 unique TCs met our inclusion criteria. The mean proportion of patients who received MRI over the entire sample was 9.9%. The proportions of patients at each hospital who received a spine MRI ranged from 0.5% to 68.7%. Younger patients, with injuries from motor vehicle collisions and pedestrian injuries, were more likely to receive MRI. When controlling for other variables, Injury Severity Score (ISS) was not associated with MRI use. Hospitals in the Northeast, level 1 TCs and non-teaching hospitals were more likely to obtain MRIs in this patient population.

Conclusion

After controlling for patient-level characteristics, variation remained in MRI use based on geography, trauma center level and teaching status. This evidence suggests that current national guidelines limiting the use of MRI for cervical spine evaluation following blunt trauma are not being followed consistently. This may be due to physicians not being up to date with best practice care, unavailability of locally adopted protocols in institutions or lack of consensus among clinical providers.

Level of evidence

Prognostic and epidemiological, level III.

Cervical Spine Injury in Burned Trauma Patients: Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes

Cervical spine injuries (CIs) carry significant morbidity and mortality; hence, cervical spine immobilization is used liberally in trauma patients, including burns. The incidence, predictors, and outcomes of CI in burn patients are unknown. A retrospective cohort from the National Trauma Data Bank between 2007 and 2012 included all burned patients with and without CI. Predictors of CI were identified by logistic regression. Outcomes with and without CI were compared with Wilcoxon rank sum test. A total of 94,964 patients were identified with burn injuries. The incidence of CI was 0.79% (n = 745). Mechanism of injury, age, and injury severity score (ISS) were significant predictors of CI. Odds of CI were 109.4 (95% CI: 61.2-195.3, P < .0001) for motor vehicle injury, 87.8 (95% CI: 47.0-164.0, P < .0001) for falls, 1.2 (95% CI: 0.6-2.3, P = .66) for fire/flame, and 2.4 (95% CI: 1.0-5.5, P < .0001) for explosion compared with reference of hot object/substance. For every year increase in age, there were 1.02 higher odds of CI (95% CI: 1.01-1.02, P < .0001). For each point increase in ISS, there were 1.05 higher odds of CI (95% CI: 1.04-1.05, P < .0001). Patients with CI had higher mortality (10.3% vs 2.9%, P < .0001), longer total length of stay (12.0 vs 2.0 days, P < .0001), intensive care unit length of stay (4.0 vs 0.0 days, P < .001), and ventilator days (1.0 vs 0.0 days, P < .0001). The incidence of CI in burn patients is low, especially when due to fire, flame, or scalds; however, CI is associated with higher mortality and worse outcomes.

Spectrum of diagnostic errors in cervical spine trauma imaging and their clinical significance

PURPOSE

To describe and categorize diagnostic errors in cervical spine CT (CsCT) interpretation performed for trauma and to assess their clinical significance.

METHODS

All CsCTs performed for trauma with diagnostic errors that came to our attention based on clinical or imaging follow-up or quality assurance peer review from 2004 to 2017 were included. The number of CsCTs performed at our institution during the same time interval was calculated. Errors were categorized as spinal/extraspinal, involving osseous/soft tissue structures, by anatomical site and level. Images were reviewed by a radiologist and two spine surgeons. For each error, the need for surgery, immobilization, CT angiogram of the neck, and MRI was assessed; if any of these were needed, the error was considered clinically significant.

RESULTS

Of an approximate total 59,000 CsCTs, 56 reports containing diagnostic errors were included. Twelve were extraspinal, and 44 were spinal (26 fractures, 15 intervertebral disc protrusions, two subluxations, one lytic bone lesion). The most common sites of spinal fractures were vertebral body (n = 10) and transverse process (n = 8); the most common levels were C5 (n = 8) and C7 (n = 6). All (n = 26) fractures and two atlantooccipital subluxations were considered clinically significant, including three patients who would have required urgent surgical stabilization (two subluxations and one facet fracture). Two transverse processes fractures did not alter the need for surgical intervention/surgical approach, immobilization, or MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, 66% of spinal diagnostic errors on CsCT were considered clinically significant, potentially altering clinical management. Transverse process and vertebral body fractures were commonly missed.

Epidemiology and Characteristics of Cervical Spine Injury in Patients Presenting to a Regional Emergency Department

Purpose

This study aims to establish the demographics and characteristics of patients with cervical spine injury (CSI) in an Irish cohort presenting to a regional emergency department.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients who underwent cervical spine computed tomography (CT) scans following trauma from January 2013 to July 2016. We looked at the mechanism of injury, mode of arrival to the emergency department, triage category, correlation between examination, and site of CSI and neurological status.

Results

Over the study period, 808 patients underwent CT scans of the cervical spine for potential CSI. The incidence of CSI in our cohort was 9.4% (n = 76). Approximately 70% (n = 53) were men. Falls (53%) and motor vehicle accidents (29%) were noted to be the more common mechanisms of injury in this cohort. The C2 region was the most common location for CSI. Only 7% (n = 5) of patients had documented neurology.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the epidemiology and characteristics of CSI presenting in an Irish cohort. The incidence of CSI was found to be 9.4% with a male preponderance and falls being the most common cause of trauma.