Computed Tomography Angiography is the Definitive Vascular Imaging Modality for Penetrating Neck Injury: A South African Experience. (March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Madsen, A. S.; Kong, V. Y.; Oosthuizen, G. V.; Bruce, J. L.; Laing, G. L.; Clarke, D. L.
• Is Part Of: Scandinavian journal of surgery. Volume 107:Number 1(2018)
• Page Start: 23
• Page End: 30
• Publication Date: 2018-03
• Subjects: Penetrating neck injury -- penetrating neck trauma -- trauma surgery -- vascular trauma -- computed tomography angiography -- imaging -- stab wounds; Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1177/1457496917731187
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1457-4969

Abstract

Background and Aims: Computed tomography angiography has become central to the diagnostic algorithm for penetrating neck injury, but despite its widespread use the literature to support this adoption is limited. We reviewed our experience with computed tomography angiography for the identification of vascular trauma in hemodynamically stable patients with penetrating neck injury at a major trauma center in South Africa. Materials and Methods: A prospectively kept trauma registry capturing data in real time was retrospectively reviewed. All patients with penetrating neck injury investigated with computed tomography angiography as the initial vascular investigation during a 47-month period were included. Results: A total of 380 patients were included. Indications for computed tomography angiography were as follows: hard signs (13), soft signs (201), no signs but proximity/zone I or III wounds (141), and undefined signs of vascular injury (25). Of the 380 scans, 7 (1.8%) were indeterminate, 299 (78.7%) negative, and 74 (19.5%) positive for a vascular injury (54 arterial and 20 isolated venous injury). Eight were false positive and 4 false negative. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values for detecting arterial injury were 93.9%, 97.5%, 85.2%, and 99.1%, respectively. Overall, the yield for demonstrating "true arterial injury" was 12.1% (46/380); hard signs: 76.9% (10/13), soft signs: 16.4% (33/201), and no signs: 2.1% (3/141) which all were secondary to gunshot wounds). Only 8.4% (32/380) required intervention for arterial injury and none for isolated venous injury (hard signs: 62.0%, soft signs: 11.4%, and no signs: 0.7%). No serious complications resulted from computed tomography angiography. Conclusion: Computed tomography angiography is a safe and effective imaging modality for the investigation of vascular trauma post penetrating neck injury. Asymptomatic patients with stab wounds do not need to be imaged regardless of proximity concerns. Symptomatic stable patients including a subgroup with hard signs should be imaged rather than explored. Computed tomography angiography provides an interventional road map and can identify injuries amenable to endovascular or conservative management.