Bodanapally Uttam K, Dreizin David, Sliker Clint W, Boscak Alexis R, Reddy Ramachandra P
1 Department of Radiology, R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical Center, 22 S Greene St, Baltimore, MD 21201.
2 Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University, Bronx, NY.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Oct;205(4):866-72. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.14161.
The purposes of this study were to assess the diagnostic performance of 40- and 64-MDCT angiography with digital subtraction angiography as the reference standard in the detection of arterial injuries in patients at high risk after penetrating neck trauma and to perform a separate analysis of injuries to the external carotid artery.
In a retrospective evaluation of 53 sets of angiograms from 51 patients with penetrating neck injury, three reviewers unaware of the digital subtraction angiographic findings reviewed the CT angiographic (CTA) images to discern the presence or absence of arterial injuries. Sensitivity and specificity of CTA were calculated per injury, and a separate analysis of external carotid artery injuries was performed.
Sensitivity of CTA for detecting arterial injuries ranged from 75.7% (95% CI, 62.3-86.9%) to 82.2% (95% CI, 69.5-92.1%). Specificity ranged from 96.4% (95% CI, 94.0-98.4%) to 98.4% (95% CI, 96.0-100%). CTA was highly sensitive for detection of the subgroup of injuries involving the large-caliber vessels that contribute to cerebral circulation. These sensitivities ranged from 92.8% (95% CI, 66-98.8%) to 100% (95% CI, 76.6-100%) for internal carotid artery injuries and from 88.9% (95% CI, 65.2-98.3%) to 94.4% (95% CI, 72.6-99.0%) for vertebral artery injuries. In contrast, sensitivity of CTA was limited for external carotid artery injuries, ranging from 63.4% (95% CI, 45.5-79.5%) to 70.0% (95% CI, 52.0-85.0%).
CTA can be used for initial evaluation and may help guide management decisions if an external carotid artery injury is detected. Negative findings should not preclude close clinical follow-up, repeat CTA evaluation, or, in the presence of high suspicion of arterial injury due to clinical findings or wound trajectory, evaluation with digital subtraction angiography.
本研究旨在以数字减影血管造影为参考标准,评估40排和64排多层螺旋CT血管造影(MDCTA)在检测穿透性颈部创伤高危患者动脉损伤中的诊断性能,并对颈外动脉损伤进行单独分析。
对51例穿透性颈部损伤患者的53组血管造影进行回顾性评估,3名不知数字减影血管造影结果的阅片者对CT血管造影(CTA)图像进行阅片,以判断有无动脉损伤。计算CTA对每种损伤的敏感性和特异性,并对颈外动脉损伤进行单独分析。
CTA检测动脉损伤的敏感性为75.7%(95%CI,62.3 - 86.9%)至82.2%(95%CI,69.5 - 92.1%)。特异性为96.4%(95%CI,94.0 - 98.4%)至98.4%(95%CI,96.0 - 100%)。CTA对检测累及参与脑循环的大口径血管的损伤亚组具有高度敏感性。颈内动脉损伤的敏感性为92.8%(95%CI,66 - 98.8%)至100%(95%CI,76.6 - 100%),椎动脉损伤的敏感性为88.9%(95%CI,65.2 - 98.3%)至94.4%(95%CI,72.6 - 99.0%)。相比之下,CTA对颈外动脉损伤的敏感性有限,为63.4%(95%CI,45.5 - 79.5%)至70.0%(95%CI,52.0 - 85.0%)。
CTA可用于初始评估,若检测到颈外动脉损伤,可能有助于指导管理决策。阴性结果不应排除密切的临床随访、重复CTA评估,或者在因临床表现或伤口轨迹高度怀疑有动脉损伤时进行数字减影血管造影评估。