American Journal of Neuroradiology, Vol 16, Issue 4 647-654, Copyright © 1995 by American Society of Neuroradiology
ARTICLES |
Penetrating neck trauma: sensitivity of clinical examination and cost- effectiveness of angiography
JG Jarvik, GR Philips 3rd, CW Schwab, JS Schwartz and RI Grossman
Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
PURPOSE: To evaluate penetrating neck trauma for (a) sensitivity of the clinical examination as an indicator of clinically significant vascular injury, and (b) cost-effectiveness of performing screening diagnostic angiography. METHODS: The medical records of all patients with penetrating neck trauma presenting at our institution over 4 years were retrospectively reviewed. Injuries were classified into one of three anatomic zones and classified into four mutually exclusive groups based on the extent of vascular injury; (a) no vascular injury; (b) minor vascular abnormality; (c) major vascular abnormality without a change in clinical management; or (d) any injury requiring a change in clinical management. Cost data were also obtained for each patient's hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 111 patients with penetrating neck trauma. No statistically significant difference between the sensitivities of the clinical examination or angiography for the detection of vascular injury were detected. Of the 48 patients who had vascular injuries, 45 had an abnormal clinical findings (93.7% sensitivity). None of the remaining 3 patients with vascular injury and normal clinical findings would have had their treatment altered by the results of angiography. The calculated cost of using angiography as a screening tool for vascular injury in patients with normal clinical findings was approximately $3.08 million per central nervous system event prevented. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that in patients with zone II penetrating neck injuries the clinical examination is sufficient to detect significant vascular lesions and that screening angiography may not be indicated. Because our sample size was relatively small and the mean follow-up only 13.3 days, further investigation is needed to demonstrate definitively the lack of usefulness of screening angiography.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  J J Brywczynski, T W Barrett, J A Lyon, and B A Cotton Management of penetrating neck injury in the emergency department: a structured literature review Emerg. Med. J., November 1, 2008; 25(11): 711 - 715. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. B. Nunez Jr, M. Torres-Leon, and F. Munera Vascular Injuries of the Neck and Thoracic Inlet: Helical CT-Angiographic Correlation RadioGraphics, July 1, 2004; 24(4): 1087 - 1098. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Munera, J. A. Soto, D. M. Palacio, J. Castaneda, C. Morales, A. Sanabria, J. E. Gutierrez, and G. Garcia Penetrating Neck Injuries: Helical CT Angiography for Initial Evaluation Radiology, August 1, 2002; 224(2): 366 - 372. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. MacFarlane and C. A. Benn Penetrating neck injury: a review Trauma, April 1, 2002; 4(2): 79 - 90. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Múnera, J. A. Soto, D. Palacio, S. M. Velez, and E. Medina Diagnosis of Arterial Injuries Caused by Penetrating Trauma to the Neck: Comparison of Helical CT Angiography and Conventional Angiography Radiology, August 1, 2000; 216(2): 356 - 362. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. D. LeBlang and D. B. Nunez Jr. Noninvasive Imaging of Cervical Vascular Injuries Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2000; 174(5): 1269 - 1278. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|