Author, date and country | Patient group | Study type (level of evidence) | Outcomes | Key results | Study Weaknesses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Berry GE. et al. 2005 USA | 103 patients admitted to a level 1 trauma centre over a 2-month period who underwent CAP CT (chest-abdomen-pelvis) and plain film evaluation of the thoracolumbar spine | Retrospective case series | CT sensitivity and specificity for thoracolumbar fracture | 100 % sensitive, 97 % specific | Only 26 of original 103 patients had TL fracture |
Plain radiograph sensitivity and specificity for thoracolumbar fracture | 73 % sensitve, 100 % specific | ||||
Negative predictive value for CT and Plain radiograph | 100 % and 92 % respectively | ||||
Area under the ROC curve for CT and Plain radiograph | 0.98 and 0.86 (P < 0.02) respectively | ||||
Antevil JL, et al 2006 USA | 573 patients evaluated for spinal trauma during two, three-month intervals. X-ray group (1999) 254 patients CT group (2002) 319 patients | Retrospective case series | Sensitivity in detecting spinal fracture | 70 % specific (14 out of 20) | Only a small proportion of the intial number of patients had spinal fracture |
Sensitivity of CT in detecting spinal fracture | 100 % specific (34 out of 34) | ||||
Rhee PM, et al 2002 USA | 115 patients identified over a period of 6 years wtih diagnosed lumbar fracture 56 patients had AP-CT scans 110 pateints underwent two-view plain films (52 patients had both screening tests) | Retrospective study | Overall performance of screening methodology using AP-CT and two-view plain films | 13/56 fractures were missed with AP-CT alone (missed fracture rate of 23.2 %), 14/110 fractures were missed by two-view plain films (missed fracture rate of 12.7 %, P = 0.08), a combination of both imaging modalities did not miss any fractures. The fractures that were missed by AP-CT and two-view plain film were not minor fractures, 46 % and 50 % respictively required surgery or brace | |
Sheridan R 2003 USA | 78 trauma patients admitted over a period of 12 months in a level 1 trauma centre with one or more thoracic or lumbar spine fractures Thoracic fractures n = 35 Lumbar fractures n = 43 | Retrospective case series | Diagnosis of thoracic spine fracture | Sensitivity of reformatted RHCT scanning was 97 %, sensitivity of conventional radiograph in diagnosis was 62 %. | small sample group |
Diagnosis of lumbar spine fracture | Sensitivity of RHCT scanning in diagnosis of lumbar spine fractures was 95 %, sensitivity of conventional radiograph in diagnosis of lumbar spine fracture was 86 %. | ||||
Inaba K, et al 2006 USA | All published studies comparing reformatted CT to traditional plain radiography for thoracolumbar spine clearance | Review article | Evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of reformatted CT and traditional plain radiography | Review articles highlighted superior sensitivity and interobserver variability for reformatted CT compared with plain radiographic screening. CT was also noted to be more accurate at localising , classifying, and delineating the age, bony intrusion, and soft-tissue damage associated with the fracture. | |
Wintermark M, et al 2003 Switzerland | 26 patients with fractured vertebrae prospectively identified from 100 consecutive severe trauma patients | Comparitive study | Overall sensitivity of multi-detector row CT | 78.1 % sensitive (97.2 % for unstable fractures) | Multi-detector row CT images were reviewed by the same three radiologists |
Overall intra-observer agreement for multi-detector row CT | kappa value = 0.787 (0.951 for unstable fractures) | ||||
Overall sensitivity for conventional radiography | 32 % sensitive (33.3 % for unstable fractures) | ||||
Overall intraobserver agreement for conventional radiography | kappa value = 0.661 (0.368 for unstable fractures) | ||||
Gestring ML, et al 2002 USA | 71 patients who sustained blunt injury and required computed lumbar spine radiographs (CLSRs) as well as abdominal and pelvic CT scans were propectively identified. 10 patients were found to have thoracolumbar fracture | Case series | Sensitivity and specificity of CT and scanograms | 100 % sensitive and 100 % specific | Only 10 patients from the original study group of 71 were found to have thoracolumbar fracture |