Effect of oral contrast administration for abdominal computed tomography in the evaluation of acute blunt trauma
- PMID: 9209218
- DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(97)70103-3
Effect of oral contrast administration for abdominal computed tomography in the evaluation of acute blunt trauma
Abstract
Study objective: To determine how frequently oral contrast medium (OC) is essential for computed tomography (CT) diagnosis of blunt intraabdominal injury and to quantify the delay associated with OC administration and the incidence of adverse effects.
Methods: This retrospective chart review, with prospective reevaluation of CT scans for diagnostic value of OC, took place in a university teaching hospital and Level l trauma center. Participants were blunt-trauma victims admitted between June 1, 1988, and November 1, 1993, who had abdominal CT as part of their initial evaluation. Trauma registry records were used to identify study patients. Available charts and CTs were reviewed for all patients with intestinal/mesenteric and pancreatic injuries. Randomly selected cases of liver injury, spleen injury, and no intraabdominal injury were also reviewed. Blinded CT scans were reevaluated for quality of bowel opacification and value of OC to diagnostic impression.
Results: During the study period, 2,162 blunt-trauma patients had an abdominal CT; 297 intraabdominal injuries were diagnosed in 248 patients. Full review was done on 124 charts, and 70 CT scans were reevaluated. Thirty-one (100%) of 31 liver and spleen injuries were diagnosed on CT, and OC was considered essential in none of these studies. One (4.5%) of 22 intestinal and mesenteric injuries was seen on CT, but this was the only such injury treated nonoperatively. None of 21 surgically confirmed intestinal/mesenteric injuries was seen on CT. Free air or free OC was seen in none of 7 cases of intestinal perforation. OC was judged essential in none of 20 scans in patients without intraabdominal injury. On 2 scans. OC was considered essential for the radiographic diagnosis. One of these was a normal pancreas at exploration (radiographic false-positive result). The only pancreatic injury requiring specific surgical treatment was missed on CT. Twenty-one percent of patients required placement of nasogastric tube for contrast administration after failing oral administration, and 23% vomited OC. One of 124 had documented aspiration of OC. Average additional time incurred in the ED for administration of OC was 144 minutes.
Conclusion: OC is rarely essential for CT diagnosis of intraabdominal injury. It may improve sensitivity for pancreatic injury, but it does not help identify injuries requiring surgical treatment. Even with OC, CT is insensitive for intestinal injury. Vomiting and aspiration are significant risks. Use of OC adds a significant amount of time to ED evaluation. Adverse effects of OC administration, in this setting, may outweigh its benefits.
Comment in
-
Diagnosis of intestinal injuries by computed tomography and the use of oral contrast medium.Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Jun;31(6):769-71. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(98)70238-0. Ann Emerg Med. 1998. PMID: 9624319 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Oral contrast solution and computed tomography for blunt abdominal trauma: a randomized study.Arch Surg. 1999 Jun;134(6):622-6; discussion 626-7. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.134.6.622. Arch Surg. 1999. PMID: 10367871 Clinical Trial.
-
Oral contrast with computed tomography in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma in children.Br J Surg. 1999 Aug;86(8):1073-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01192.x. Br J Surg. 1999. PMID: 10460648
-
Oral contrast is not necessary in the evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma by computed tomography.Am J Surg. 1993 Dec;166(6):680-4; discussion 684-5. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80679-8. Am J Surg. 1993. PMID: 8273849 Clinical Trial.
-
Performance of helical computed tomography without oral contrast for the detection of gastrointestinal injuries.Ann Emerg Med. 2004 Jan;43(1):120-8. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(03)00727-3. Ann Emerg Med. 2004. PMID: 14707951 Review.
-
The risk of intra-abdominal injuries in pediatric patients with stable blunt abdominal trauma and negative abdominal computed tomography.Acad Emerg Med. 2010 May;17(5):469-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00737.x. Acad Emerg Med. 2010. PMID: 20536798 Review.
Cited by
-
Utility of CT oral contrast administration in the emergency department of a quaternary oncology hospital: diagnostic implications, turnaround times, and assessment of ED physician ordering.Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017 Nov;42(11):2760-2768. doi: 10.1007/s00261-017-1175-7. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017. PMID: 28523416 Free PMC article.
-
Ability of specific and nonspecific signs of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in the diagnosis of blunt surgically important bowel and mesenteric injuries.Radiol Med. 2018 Dec;123(12):891-903. doi: 10.1007/s11547-018-0923-2. Epub 2018 Jul 23. Radiol Med. 2018. PMID: 30039378
-
Imaging colorectal trauma using 64-MDCT technology.Emerg Radiol. 2009 Nov;16(6):433-40. doi: 10.1007/s10140-009-0810-1. Epub 2009 Apr 25. Emerg Radiol. 2009. PMID: 19396481 Review.
-
Initial imaging in the trauma patient.West J Med. 1998 Jan;168(1):37-9. West J Med. 1998. PMID: 9448491 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Use of positive oral contrast agents in abdominopelvic computed tomography for blunt abdominal injury: meta-analysis and systematic review.Eur Radiol. 2013 Sep;23(9):2513-21. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2860-8. Epub 2013 Apr 27. Eur Radiol. 2013. PMID: 23624596
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials