ArticleEmergency radiology2015
Significance of post-traumatic maxillary sinus fluid, or lack of fluid, in a level II trauma population.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Concomitant Orbital Floor Fractures in Patients with Head Trauma Using Conventional Head CT Scan: A Retrospective Study at a Level II Trauma Center.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our goal was to test the predictive value of high-attenuation material within the maxillary sinus for adjacent facial bone fracture. After IRB approval, all blunt trauma facial CTs performed over a 5-month period at a level II trauma center were reviewed in consensus by three radiologists for the presence of facial fractures or high attenuation maxillary sinus opacity (≥30HU, ≥40HU, or ≥50HU). Three classes of fractures were analyzed: any fracture, any fracture contiguous with the maxillary sinus, and only fractures not contiguous with the maxillary sinus. Statistics were calculated using two-by-two tables. A total of 844 cases were reviewed with 273 patients having any fracture. There were 402 hemi-faces with any fracture and 62 hemi-faces with fracture contiguous with the maxillary sinus. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for any fracture (using the ≥40HU threshold) were 13, 99, 85, and 78 % respectively; for fracture contiguous with the sinus, these were 71, 99, 72, and 99 % respectively; and for only non-contiguous fractures, these were 2.3, 96, 13, and 80 %, respectively. We conclude that in this level II trauma population, lack of high attenuation maxillary sinus material nearly ruled out fractures in contiguity with the sinus. High-attenuation sinus material is only moderately predictive of a fracture contiguous with the maxillary sinus. Therefore, if after careful review a fracture is not identified, the radiologist should not be overly concerned that a fracture is being missed. High-attenuation sinus material is a poor marker for fractures not contiguous with the maxillary sinus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.