Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27686086›Full record

Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2017

Radiological findings and radiation exposure during trauma workup in a cohort of 1124 level 1 trauma patients.

G F Giannakopoulos, T P Saltzherr, L F M Beenen, G J Streekstra, J B Reitsma, F W Bloemers, J C Goslings, F C Bakker, REACT study group

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Ultra-low dose post-operative CT protocol after acetabular fixation has excellent intra- and inter-observer reliability.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G F GiannakopoulosDepartment of Trauma Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, Room 7F-002, PO Box 7057, NL - 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. gf.giannakopoulos@gmail.com.
T P SaltzherrTrauma Unit, Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
L F M BeenenDepartment of Radiology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G J StreekstraDepartment of Radiology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J B ReitsmaDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
F W BloemersDepartment of Trauma Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, Room 7F-002, PO Box 7057, NL - 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J C GoslingsTrauma Unit, Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
F C BakkerDepartment of Trauma Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, Room 7F-002, PO Box 7057, NL - 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
REACT study group
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the initial assessment of patients with potential severe injuries, radiological examinations are performed in order to rapidly diagnose clinically relevant injuries. Previous studies have shown that performing these examinations routinely is not always necessary and that trauma patients are exposed to substantial radiation doses. The aim of this study was to assess the amount and findings of radiological examinations during the initial assessment of trauma patients and to determine the radiation doses to which these patients are exposed to.

methodsWe analyzed the 1124 patients included in a randomized trial. All radiological examinations during the initial assessment (i.e., primary and secondary survey) were assessed. The examination results were categorized as positive findings (i.e., (suspicion for) traumatic injury) and normal findings. The effective radiation doses for the examinations were calculated separately for each patient.

resultsEight hundred and three patients were male (71 %), median age was 38 years, and 1079 patients sustained blunt trauma (96 %). During initial assessment, almost 3900 X-rays were performed, of which 25.4 % showed positive findings. FAST of the abdomen was performed in 989 patients (88 %), with positive findings in 10.6 %. Additional CT scanning of specific body regions was performed 1890 times in 813 patients (72.1 %), of which approximately 43.4 % revealed positive findings. Hemodynamically stable patients showed more normal findings on the radiographic studies than unstable patients. The mean radiation doses for the total population was 8.46 mSv (±7.7) and for polytraumatized patients (ISS ≥ 16) 14.3 mSv (±9.5).

conclusionRadiological diagnostics during initial assessment of trauma patients show a high rate of normal findings in our trauma system. The radiation doses to which trauma patients are exposed are considerable. Considering that the majority of the injured patients are hemodynamically stable, we suggest more selective use of X-ray and CT scanning.

Indexed as

Radiation ExposureAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedTrauma CentersWounds and InjuriesDiagnosisOveruseRadiologyTrauma

Identifiers

PMID27686086
OpenAlexW2523968096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.