ArticleSingapore medical journal2016
The role of multidetector computed tomography versus digital subtraction angiography in triaging care and management in abdominopelvic trauma.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of Contrast Extravasation on Computed Tomography for Diagnosing Severe Pelvic Hemorrhage in Pelvic Trauma Patients: A Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Pooled it
- Future directions in the treatment of pelvic fractures with abdominal organ injury: the potential of combined endovascular embolization and external fixation techniques.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Do we really need the arterial phase on CT in pelvic trauma patients?Emergency radiology · 2021Article
- European Society of Emergency Radiology: guideline on radiological polytrauma imaging and service (short version).Insights into imaging · 2020Article
- The European guideline on management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following trauma: fifth edition.Critical care (London, England) · 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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to assess the ability of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) to detect active abdominopelvic haemorrhage in patients with blunt trauma, as compared to digital subtraction angiography (DSA).
methodsIn this retrospective study, patients who underwent DSA within 24 hours following CECT for blunt abdominal and/or pelvic trauma were identified. The computed tomography (CT) trauma protocol consisted of a portal venous phase scan without CT angiography; delayed phase study was performed if appropriate. All selected CECT studies were independently reviewed for the presence of active extravasation of contrast by two radiologists, who were blinded to the DSA results. Fisher's exact test was used to correlate the presence of extravasation on CT with subsequent confirmed haemorrhage on DSA.
resultsDuring the eight-year study period, 51 patients underwent CECT prior to emergent DSA for abdominal or pelvic trauma. Evidence of active extravasation of contrast on CECT was observed in 35 patients and active haemorrhage was confirmed on DSA in 31 of these patients; embolisation was performed in all 31 patients. Two patients who were negative for active extravasation of contrast on CECT but positive for active haemorrhage on DSA had extensive bilateral pelvic fractures and haematomas. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of CECT in detecting active abdominopelvic haemorrhage, as compared to DSA, were 93.9%, 77.8%, 88.6% and 87.5%, respectively.
conclusionWhen compared with DSA, dual-phase CECT without CT angiography shows high sensitivity and positive predictive value for the detection of active haemorrhage in patients with blunt abdominopelvic trauma.
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.