Ultra-low-dose CT for extremities in an acute setting: initial experience with 203 subjects.
Acute Disease
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Ankle
/ diagnostic imaging
Ankle Fractures
/ diagnostic imaging
Extremities
/ diagnostic imaging
Female
Fractures, Bone
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Multidetector Computed Tomography
/ methods
Radiation Dosage
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Wrist
/ diagnostic imaging
Wrist Injuries
/ diagnostic imaging
Young Adult
Ankle injuries/treatment
Emergency radiology
Low-dose CT
Multidetector CT
Radiography
Trauma
Wrist injuries/treatment
Journal
Skeletal radiology
ISSN: 1432-2161
Titre abrégé: Skeletal Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7701953
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
03
05
2019
accepted:
29
08
2019
revised:
28
08
2019
pubmed:
11
9
2019
medline:
29
12
2020
entrez:
11
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to assess if ultra-low-dose CT is a useful clinical alternative to digital radiographs in the evaluation of acute wrist and ankle fractures. An ultra-low-dose protocol was designed on a 256-slice multi-detector CT. Patients from the emergency department were evaluated prospectively. After initial digital radiographs, an ultra-low-dose CT was performed. Two readers independently analyzed the images. Also, the radiation dose, examination time, and time to preliminary report was compared between digital radiographs and CT. In 207 extremities, digital radiography and ultra-low-dose CT detected 73 and 109 fractures, respectively (p < 0.001). The odds ratio for fracture detection with ultra-low-dose CT vs. digital radiography was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.4-3.0). CT detected additional fracture-related findings in 33 cases (15.9%) and confirmed or ruled out suspected fractures in 19 cases (9.2%). The mean effective dose was comparable between ultra-low-dose CT and digital radiography (0.59 ± 0.33 μSv, 95% CI 0.47-0.59 vs. 0.53 ± 0.43 μSv, 95% CI 0.54-0.64). The mean combined examination time plus time to preliminary report was shorter for ultra-low-dose CT compared to digital radiography (7.6 ± 2.5 min, 95% CI 7.1-8.1 vs. 9.8 ± 4.7 min, 95% CI 8.8-10.7) (p = 0.002). The recommended treatment changed in 34 (16.4%) extremities. Ultra-low-dose CT is a useful alternative to digital radiography for imaging the peripheral skeleton in the acute setting as it detects significantly more fractures and provides additional clinically important information, at a comparable radiation dose. It also provides faster combined examination and reporting times.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31501959
doi: 10.1007/s00256-019-03309-7
pii: 10.1007/s00256-019-03309-7
pmc: PMC7021773
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
531-539Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Nov 25;100(24):13761-6
pubmed: 14610281
Bone Joint J. 2016 Dec;98-B(12):1668-1673
pubmed: 27909130
Eur Radiol. 2017 Sep;27(9):3609-3617
pubmed: 28116512
Radiology. 2001 Apr;219(1):11-28
pubmed: 11274530
Radiology. 2011 May;259(2):311-6
pubmed: 21502387
Emerg Med J. 2001 Jul;18(4):263-9
pubmed: 11435359
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jan;190(1):10-6
pubmed: 18094287
Radiol Med. 2018 Oct;123(10):765-777
pubmed: 29869227
Skeletal Radiol. 1986;15(1):27-31
pubmed: 3941920
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989 Sep;153(3):529-32
pubmed: 2763950
Br J Radiol. 2017 Aug;90(1077):20170240
pubmed: 28707536
Can Assoc Radiol J. 2013 Nov;64(4):314-8
pubmed: 24314582
Skeletal Radiol. 2015 Jun;44(6):797-809
pubmed: 25652734
J Orthop Trauma. 2017 Aug;31(8):401-406
pubmed: 28394843
Skeletal Radiol. 2019 Jun;48(6):949-957
pubmed: 30406835
Br J Radiol. 2015 Oct;88(1054):20150463
pubmed: 26234823
Radiology. 2014 Oct;273(1):153-9
pubmed: 24937693
J Foot Ankle Res. 2015 Mar 12;8:8
pubmed: 25788986