Ozimok Cory J, Mellnick Vincent M, Patlas Michael N
Department of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Washington University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Emerg Radiol. 2019 Apr;26(2):117-121. doi: 10.1007/s10140-018-1650-7. Epub 2018 Oct 21.
There is controversy regarding the administration of oral and rectal contrast for CT performed to detect bowel injury in the context of penetrating torso trauma. Given the lack of published societal guidelines, our goal was to survey radiologists from the American Society of Emergency Radiology membership database to determine consensus on CT protocols for penetrating trauma.
With ethics board approval, an anonymous ten-question online survey was distributed via email to 589 radiologists in the American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER) member database. The survey was open for a 4-week period in February 2018. A commercially available website that allows subscribers to create and analyze survey results was used for analysis.
We received 124 responses (21% response rate) with a majority from U.S. institutions (82%). Seventy-four percent of respondents indicated they do not routinely administer oral contrast in penetrating trauma, 68% do not administer rectal contrast, and 90% do not use commercially available software to assess penetrating injury trajectory. Results from U.S. and non-U.S. practices were comparable. The decision to administer intraluminal contrast is made by the referring physician at 52% of institutions. There is in-house attending level radiology coverage at 54% of institutions and when asked if trauma scans are reviewed before removing the patient from the table, 41% of respondents answered "No."
Enteric contrast is used in a minority of respondents' centers for penetrating trauma cases, which is likely driven by a perceived lack of added benefit and delays in patient care.
对于在穿透性躯干创伤情况下进行CT检查以检测肠损伤时口服和直肠对比剂的使用,存在争议。鉴于缺乏已发表的社会指南,我们的目标是对美国急诊放射学会会员数据库中的放射科医生进行调查,以确定关于穿透性创伤CT方案的共识。
经伦理委员会批准,通过电子邮件向美国急诊放射学会(ASER)会员数据库中的589名放射科医生分发了一份包含10个问题的匿名在线调查问卷。该调查于2018年2月开放为期4周。使用一个允许订阅者创建和分析调查结果的商业网站进行分析。
我们收到了124份回复(回复率为21%),其中大多数来自美国机构(82%)。74%的受访者表示他们在穿透性创伤中不常规使用口服对比剂,68%不使用直肠对比剂,90%不使用商业软件评估穿透性损伤轨迹。美国和非美国的做法结果相当。52%的机构由转诊医生决定是否使用腔内对比剂。54%的机构有放射科主治医生在内部值班,当被问及在将患者从检查台上移走之前是否会复查创伤扫描时,41%的受访者回答“否”。
在少数受访者所在的中心,肠道对比剂用于穿透性创伤病例,这可能是由于认为缺乏额外益处以及会延误患者治疗。