MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Is focused magnetic resonance imaging adequate for treatment decision making in acute traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures seen on whole spine computed tomography?
Author: Khurana B, Karim SM, Zampini JM, Jimale H, Cho CH, Harris MB, Sodickson AD, Bono CM.
Journal: Spine J; 2019 Mar; 19(3):403-410. PubMed ID: 30145370.
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To assess whether a focused magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) limited to the region of known acute traumatic thoracic or lumbar fracture(s) would miss any clinically significant injuries that would change patient management. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A multicenter retrospective clinical study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Adult patients with acute traumatic thoracic and/or lumbar spine fracture(s). OUTCOME MEASURES: Pathology identified on MRI (ligamentous disruption, epidural hematoma, and cord contusion), outside of the focused zone, an alteration in patient management, including surgical and nonsurgical, as a result of the identified pathology outside the focused zone. METHODS: Records were reviewed for all adult trauma patients who presented to the emergency department between 2008 and 2016 with one or more fracture(s) of the thoracic and/or lumbar spine identified on computed tomography (CT) and who underwent MRI of the entire thoracic and lumbar spine within 10 days. Exclusion criteria were patients with >4 fractured levels, pathologic fractures, isolated transverse, and/or spinous process fractures, prior vertebral augmentation, and prior thoracic or lumbar spine instrumentation. Patients with neurologic deficits or cervical spine fractures were also included. MRIs were reviewed independently by one spine surgeon and one musculoskeletal fellowship-trained emergency radiologist for posterior ligamentous complex (PLC) integrity, vertebral injury, epidural hematoma, and cord contusion. The surgeon also commented on the clinical significance of the pathology identified outside the focused zone. All cases in which pathology was identified outside of the focused zone (three levels above and below the fractures) were independently reviewed by a second spine surgeon to determine whether the pathology was clinically significant and would alter the treatment plan. RESULTS: In total, 126 patients with 216 fractures identified on CT were included, with a median age of 49 years. There were 81 males (64%). Sixty-two (49%) patients had isolated thoracolumbar junction injuries and 36 (29%) had injuries limited to a single fractured level. Forty-seven (37%) patients were managed operatively. PLC injury was identified by both readers in 36 (29%) patients with a percent agreement of 96% and κ coefficient of 0.91 (95% CI 0.87-0.95). Both readers independently agreed that there was no pathology identified on the complete thoracic and lumbar spine MRIs outside the focused zone in 107 (85%) patients. Injury outside the focused zone was identified by at least one reader in 19 (15%) patients. None of the readers identified PLC injury, cord edema, or noncontiguous epidural hematoma outside the focused zone. Percent agreement for outside pathology between the two readers was 92% with a κ coefficient of 0.60 (95% CI 0.48-0.72). The two spine surgeons independently agreed that none of the identified pathology outside of the focused zone altered management. CONCLUSIONS: A focused MRI protocol of three levels above and below known thoracolumbar spine fractures would have missed radiological abnormality in 15% of patients. However, the pathology, such as vertebral body edema not appreciated on CT, was not clinically significant and did not alter patient care. Based on these findings, the investigators conclude that a focused protocol would decrease the imaging time while providing the information of the injured segment with minimal risk of missing any clinically significant injuries.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]