ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2023
Cervical spine flexion-extension radiography versus magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients following blunt traumatic injury.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In pediatric trauma patients, 60-80% of spinal cord injuries involve the cervical vertebrae. While the American College of Radiology offers guidelines for best imaging practices in the setting of acute pediatric trauma, there is a lack of uniformity in imaging-decision protocols across institutions. MRI has been shown to demonstrate high sensitivity for both bony and ligamentous injuries while also avoiding unnecessary radiation exposure in the pediatric patient population. However, the efficacy of flexion-extension (FE) radiography following initial MRI has not been evaluated in children. Our hypothesis is that FE radiography conducted following an initial MRI does not contribute significant diagnostic information or reduce time to cervical collar removal and thus can be removed from institutional protocols in order to avoid unnecessary testing and reduce pediatric radiation exposure. Methods: Trauma data were collected for pediatric patients presenting with suspected acute cervical spine injury from 2014 to 2021. A total of 108 patients were subdivided into 41 patients who received "MRI Only" and 67 patients who received both "MRI and FE" diagnostic cervical spine imaging. Chi-square testing and t-tests were performed to determine differences between MRI and FE radiographic detection rates of bony and ligamentous injuries in the subgroups. Results: In patients for whom FE did not find any injury, MRI detected bony and ligamentous injuries in 9/63 and 12/65 cases, respectively. In 3/21 (14.3%) cases in which MRI detected a bony and/or ligamentous injury and FE did not, patients eventually required surgical intervention for c-spine stabilization. No patients required surgical fixation when FE radiography showed an abnormality and MRI was normal. Addition of follow-up FE radiography after initial MRI did not have a significant effect on overall hospital length of stay (MRI Only vs MRI+FE: 9.2±12.0 days vs 8.6±13.5 days, p=0.816) or on rates of collar removal at discharge or greater than 48 hours after imaging (MRI Only vs MRI+FE: 41.5% vs 56.7%, p=0.124). Conclusions: FE radiography following initial MRI did not have a significant effect on reducing time to cervical collar removal or overall hospital length of stay. In addition, in 3 of 6 cases (50.0%) in which surgical fixation was required, MRI detected ligamentous and/or bony injury while FE radiography was normal. Level of Evidence: This study contributes Level 2b scientific evidence consistent with a well-designed cohort or case-control analytic study.
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.