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
Observational Study
. 2020 Feb;41(2):213-218.
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A6408. Epub 2020 Jan 23.

Predictive Value of Noncontrast Head CT with Negative Findings in the Emergency Department Setting

Affiliations
Observational Study

Predictive Value of Noncontrast Head CT with Negative Findings in the Emergency Department Setting

A L Callen et al. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2020 Feb.

Abstract

Background and purpose: Noncontrast head CTs are routinely acquired for patients with neurologic symptoms in the emergency department setting. Anecdotally, noncontrast head CTs performed in patients with prior negative findings with the same clinical indication are of low diagnostic yield. We hypothesized that the rate of acute findings in noncontrast head CTs performed in patients with a preceding study with negative findings would be lower compared with patients being imaged for the first time.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients in the emergency department setting who underwent noncontrast head CTs at our institution during a 4-year period, recording whether the patient had undergone a prior noncontrast head CT, the clinical indication for the examination, and the examination outcome. Positive findings on examinations were defined as those that showed any intracranial abnormality that would necessitate a change in acute management, such as acute hemorrhage, hydrocephalus, herniation, or interval worsening of a prior finding.

Results: During the study period, 8160 patients in the emergency department setting underwent a total of 9593 noncontrast head CTs; 88.2% (7198/8160) had a single examination, and 11.8% (962/8160) had at least 1 repeat examination. The baseline positive rate of the "nonrepeat" group was 4.3% (308/7198). The 911 patients in the "repeat" group with negative findings on a baseline/first CT had a total of 1359 repeat noncontrast head CTs during the study period. The rate of positive findings for these repeat examinations was 1.8% (25/1359), significantly lower than the 4.3% baseline rate (P < .001). Of the repeat examinations that had positive findings, 80% (20/25) had a study indication that was discordant with that of the prior examination, compared with only 44% (593/1334) of the repeat examinations that had negative findings (P < .001).

Conclusions: In a retrospective observational study based on approximately 10,000 examinations, we found that serial noncontrast head CT examinations in patients with prior negative findings with the same study indication are less likely to have positive findings compared with first-time examinations or examinations with a new indication. This finding suggests a negative predictive value of a prior noncontrast head CT examination with negative findings with the same clinical indication.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
Histogram showing the number of patients in the repeat group who had 1, 2, 3, and >3 repeat NCHCT examinations during the study period.
FIG 2.
FIG 2.
Rate of positive findings in first/baseline-versus-subsequent examinations. Repeat NCHCT examinations that followed a prior examination with negative findings had a much lower rate of positive findings (1.8%) than examinations in the nonrepeat group (4.3%) or the first examination of patients in the repeat group (5.3%). There was no significant difference between the rate of positive findings in the nonrepeat group and the first/baseline examination in the repeat group.

References

    1. Hess EP, Haas LR, Shah ND, et al. . Trends in computed tomography utilization rates: a longitudinal practice-based study. J Patient Saf 2014;10:52–58 10.1097/PTS.0b013e3182948b1a - DOI - PubMed
    1. Larson DB, Johnson LW, Schnell BM, et al. . National trends in CT use in the emergency department: 1995–2007. Radiology 2011;258:164–73 10.1148/radiol.10100640 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hussein W, Mullins PM, Alghamdi K, et al. . Trends in advanced computed tomography use for injured patients in United States emergency departments: 2007–2010. Acad Emerg Med 2015;22:663–69 10.1111/acem.12684 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, et al. . Continued growth in emergency department imaging is bucking the overall trends. J Am Coll Radiol 2014;11:1044–47 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.07.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin DC, Parker L, Rao VM. Recent trends in imaging use in hospital settings: implications for future planning. J Am Coll Radiol 2017;14:331–36 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.08.025 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types