Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35322323›Full record

ArticleEmergency radiology2022

Diagnostic performance of triple-contrast versus single-contrast multi-detector computed tomography for the evaluation of penetrating bowel injury.

Fabio M Paes, Anthony M Durso, Denver S Pinto, Brian Covello, Douglas S Katz, Felipe Munera

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency radiology, 2022. 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
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fabio M PaesDepartment of Radiology, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave, West Wing 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. fpaes@med.miami.edu.
Anthony M DursoDepartment of Radiology, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave, West Wing 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Denver S PintoDepartment of Radiology, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave, West Wing 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Brian CovelloDepartment of Radiology, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave, West Wing 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Douglas S KatzDepartment of Radiology, NYU Winthrop Hospital, 259 First Street, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA.
Felipe MuneraDepartment of Radiology, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave, West Wing 279, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
University of Miami · USJackson Memorial Hospital · USWinthrop-University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSelecting groups of low-risk penetrating trauma patients to forego laparotomy can be challenging. The presence of bowel injury may prevent non-operative management. Optimal CT technique to detect bowel injury related to penetrating injury is controversial. Our goal is to compare the diagnostic performance of triple-contrast (oral, rectal, and IV) against IV contrast-only CT, for the detection of bowel injury from penetrating abdominopelvic trauma, using surgical diagnosis as the reference standard.

methodsNine hundred ninety-seven patients who underwent CT for penetrating torso trauma at a single institution between 2009 and 2016 in our HIPPA-compliant and institutional review board-approved retrospective cohort study. A total of 143 patients, including 15 females and 123 males underwent a pre-operative CT, followed by exploratory laparotomy. Of these, 56 patients received triple-contrast CT. CT examinations were independently reviewed by two radiologists, blinded to surgical outcome and clinical presentation. Results were stratified by contrast type and injury mechanism and were compared based upon diagnostic performance indicators of sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value. Area under the receiving operating characteristics curves were analyzed for determination of diagnostic accuracy.

resultsBowel injury was present in 45 out of 143 patients (10 on triple-contrast group and 35 on IV contrast-only group). Specificity and accuracy were higher with triple-contrast CT (98% specific, 97-99% accurate) compared to IV contrast-only CT (66% specific, 78-79% accurate). Sensitivity was highest with IV contrast-only CT (91% sensitive) compared with triple-contrast CT (75% sensitive), although this difference was not statistically significant. Triple-contrast technique increased diagnostic accuracy for both radiologists regardless of mechanism of injury.

conclusionIn our retrospective single-institution cohort study, triple-contrast MDCT had greater accuracy, specificity, and positive predictive values when compared to IV contrast-only CT in evaluating for bowel injury from penetrating wounds.

Indexed as

Abdominal InjuriesWounds, PenetratingCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMultidetector Computed TomographyRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityBowelContrastCTInjuryPenetratingTrauma

Identifiers

PMID35322323
OpenAlexW4220754185

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.