Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 May 15;184(8):869-76.
doi: 10.1503/cmaj.111420. Epub 2012 Mar 5.

Accuracy of single-pass whole-body computed tomography for detection of injuries in patients with major blunt trauma

Affiliations

Accuracy of single-pass whole-body computed tomography for detection of injuries in patients with major blunt trauma

Dirk Stengel et al. CMAJ. .

Abstract

Background: Contrast-enhanced whole-body computed tomography (also called "pan-scanning") is considered to be a conclusive diagnostic tool for major trauma. We sought to determine the accuracy of this method, focusing on the reliability of negative results.

Methods: Between July 2006 and December 2008, a total of 982 patients with suspected severe injuries underwent single-pass pan-scanning at a metropolitan trauma centre. The findings of the scan were independently evaluated by two reviewers who analyzed the injuries to five body regions and compared the results to a synopsis of hospital charts, subsequent imaging and interventional procedures. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the pan-scan for each body region, and we assessed the residual risk of missed injuries that required surgery or critical care.

Results: A total of 1756 injuries were detected in the 982 patients scanned. Of these, 360 patients had an Injury Severity Score greater than 15. The median length of follow-up was 39 (interquartile range 7-490) days, and 474 patients underwent a definitive reference test. The sensitivity of the initial pan-scan was 84.6% for head and neck injuries, 79.6% for facial injuries, 86.7% for thoracic injuries, 85.7% for abdominal injuries and 86.2% for pelvic injuries. Specificity was 98.9% for head and neck injuries, 99.1% for facial injuries, 98.9% for thoracic injuries, 97.5% for abdominal injuries and 99.8% for pelvic injuries. In total, 62 patients had 70 missed injuries, indicating a residual risk of 6.3% (95% confidence interval 4.9%-8.0%).

Interpretation: We found that the positive results of trauma pan-scans are conclusive but negative results require subsequent confirmation. The pan-scan algorithms reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of missed injuries, and they should not replace close monitoring and clinical follow-up of patients with major trauma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Flow diagram of the Pan-Scan for Trauma Resuscitation (PATRES) study of the accuracy of using single-pass whole-body computed tomography (pan-scan) to detect injuries in patients who had sustained high-velocity trauma.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Association between diagnostic accuracy and the time between admission to hospital and the start of the pan-scan.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Predicted probability of missing therapeutically relevant injuries in relation to the time between admission to hospital and the start of the pan-scan, as determined by logistic regression. Dashed lines represent 95% confidence intervals.

References

    1. Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med 2006;3:e442. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information National trauma registry 2011 report: hospitalizations for major injury in Canada, 2008–2009 Data. Montréal (Qc): The Institute: 2011
    1. Chen CW, Chu CM, Yu WY, et al. Incidence rate and risk factors of missed injuries in major trauma patients. Accid Anal Prev 2011;43:823–8 - PubMed
    1. Pfeifer R, Pape HC. Missed injuries in trauma patients: A literature review. Patient Saf Surg 2008;2:20. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Deunk J, Brink M, Dekker HM, et al. Routine versus selective computed tomography of the abdomen, pelvis, and lumbar spine in blunt trauma: a prospective evaluation. J Trauma 2009;66: 1108–17 - PubMed