Van Vugt Raoul, Keus Frederik, Kool Digna, Deunk Jaap, Edwards Michael
Department of Surgery and Trauma, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6500 HB.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 23;2013(12):CD009743. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009743.pub2.
Trauma is the fifth leading cause of death worldwide, and in people younger than 40 years of age, it is the leading cause of death. During the resuscitation of trauma patients at the emergency department, there are two different commonly used diagnostic strategies. Conventionally, there is the use of physical examination and conventional diagnostic imaging, potentially followed by selective use of computed tomography (CT). Alternatively, there is the use of physical examination and conventional diagnostics, followed by a routine (instead of selective) use of thoracoabdominal CT. It is currently unknown which of the two strategies is the better diagnostic strategy for patients with blunt high-energy trauma.
To assess the effects of routine thoracoabdominal CT compared with selective thoracoabdominal CT on mortality in blunt high-energy trauma patients.
We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 4, 2013); MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP) and CINAHL for all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We did not restrict the searches by language, date or publication status. We conducted the search on the 9 May 2013.
We included RCTs of trauma resuscitation algorithms using routine thoracoabdominal CT versus algorithms using selective CT in this review. We included all blunt high-energy trauma patients (including blast or barotrauma).
Two authors independently evaluated the search results.
The systematic search identified 481 references; after removal of duplicates, 396 remained. We found no RCTs comparing routine versus selective thoracoabdominal CT in blunt high-energy trauma patients. We excluded 381 studies based on the abstracts of the publications because of irrelevance to the review topic, and a further 15 studies after full-text evaluation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no RCTs of routine versus selective thoracoabdominal CT in patients with blunt high-energy trauma. Based on the lack of evidence from RCTs, it is not possible to say which approach is better in reducing deaths.
创伤是全球第五大死因,在40岁以下人群中,它是首要死因。在急诊科对创伤患者进行复苏时,有两种常用的诊断策略。传统上,采用体格检查和传统诊断成像,可能随后选择性地使用计算机断层扫描(CT)。另一种方法是,先进行体格检查和传统诊断,然后常规(而非选择性)使用胸腹CT。目前尚不清楚这两种策略中哪一种对钝性高能创伤患者是更好的诊断策略。
评估与选择性胸腹CT相比,常规胸腹CT对钝性高能创伤患者死亡率的影响。
我们检索了Cochrane损伤组专业注册库、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(2013年第4期);MEDLINE(OvidSP)、EMBASE(OvidSP)和CINAHL以查找所有已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们没有对检索进行语言、日期或出版状态的限制。检索于2013年5月9日进行。
本综述纳入了使用常规胸腹CT与使用选择性CT的创伤复苏算法的RCT。我们纳入了所有钝性高能创伤患者(包括爆炸伤或气压伤)。
两位作者独立评估检索结果。
系统检索共识别出481篇参考文献;去除重复文献后,剩余396篇。我们未找到比较钝性高能创伤患者常规与选择性胸腹CT的RCT。基于出版物摘要,我们排除了381项与综述主题无关的研究,全文评估后又排除了15项研究。
我们未找到钝性高能创伤患者常规与选择性胸腹CT的RCT。基于RCT缺乏证据,无法确定哪种方法在降低死亡方面更好。