ArticleWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2026
Trust, but verify: the importance of additional imaging after BCVI screening.
Article in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2026. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical practice guidelines recommend screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) based on the Denver Criteria. BCVI is typically treated with antithrombotic therapy, which may be high-risk in patients with concomitant brain or spine injuries. At our center, we often perform additional imaging in high-risk patients after positive initial screening for BCVI. Our study investigates how frequently follow-up imaging changes diagnosis and management of patients screening positive for BCVI.
methodsA cross-sectional study of all trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma center with cervical spine or facial fractures between May 2019 and December 2022 was performed. Chart review was conducted to identify all patients who had a positive screening study for BCVI. Individual charts were reviewed for BCVI screening and additional imaging test modality and results, as well as timing and specifics of treatment recommendations.
resultsA total of 2668 patients met inclusion criteria. 1407 of these patients received BCVI screening, 11 with Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) and 1396 with Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA). Of those screened, 254 (9.5%) had with positive or equivocal findings, of which 197 (77.6%) patients received a second study, including 2 patients who received multiple studies. Additional imaging studies resulted in a change in the diagnosis in 96 patients (48.7%), including 105 studies (53.3%) that found no injury or chronic findings. The results of additional studies changed patient management in in 64 (32.5%) cases.
conclusionsIn our study, follow-up BCVI imaging frequently identified discordant findings in a third of screening tests. This suggests that starting antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy based on screening studies alone could result in overtreatment in a high-risk patient population.
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.