Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of CEUS in the assessment of haemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma

  • EMERGENCY RADIOLOGY
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) still represents the preferred imaging method in the assessment of patients presenting with multiple trauma. Nevertheless, in patients with low-energy abdominal trauma, the use of CT is debated because of the possible unnecessary radiation exposure. Accordingly, conventional ultrasound (US) imaging has been increasingly employed as the initial imaging modality in the workup of minor traumatic emergency conditions. Focused assessment with sonography for trauma is widely used to detect free intra-abdominal fluid, but its role is controversial, because the absence of free fluid does not exclude the presence of injuries to abdominal organ. Injection of an ultrasound contrast agent (UCA) may give the radiologist relevant additional information to that obtained with conventional US. Thus, in trauma patients, following early assessment with conventional US imaging, a contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) can provide a more reliable evaluation of solid organ injuries and related vascular complications, including active bleeding, pseudoaneurysms, and artero-venous fistulas. CEUS cannot replace abdominal CT, but it represents a noninvasive and repeatable imaging tool capable of providing a reliable assessment of trauma severity and expedite the patient’s treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Scalea TM, Rodriguez A, Chiu WC et al (1999) Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST): results from an international consensus conference. J Trauma 46:466–472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bode PJ, Edwards MJ, Kruit MC et al (1999) Sonography in a clinical algorithm for early evaluation of 1671 patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Am J Roentgenol 172:905–911

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Korner M, Krotz MM, Degenhart C et al (2008) Current role of emergency US in patients with major trauma. Radiographics 28:225–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lingawi SS, Buckley AR (2000) Focused abdominal US in patients with trauma. Radiology 217:426–429

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Valentino M, Serra C, Pavlica P et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for blunt abdominal trauma. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 28:130–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shackford SR, Rogers FB, Osler TM et al (1999) Focused abdominal sonogram for trauma: the learning curve of nonradiologist clinicians in detecting hemoperitoneum. J Trauma 46:553–564

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Poletti PA, Wintermark M, Schnyder P, Becker CD (2002) Traumatic injuries: role of imaging in the management of polytrauma victim (conservative expectation). Eur Radiol 12:969–978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2010) Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology 257:24–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Burns PN, Wilson SR (2006) Microbubble contrast for radiological imaging: 1 Principles. Ultrasound Q 22:5–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bertolotto M, Catalano O (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: past, present, and future. Ultrasound Clin 4:339–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Leen E, Moug SJ, Horgan P (2004) Potential impact and utilization of ultrasound contrast media. Eur Radiol 14(Suppl 8):P16–P24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thorelius L (2007) Emergency real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for detection of solid organ injuries. Eur Radiol 17(Suppl 6):F107–F111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cokkinos D, Antypa E, Kalogeropuolos I et al (2013) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound performed under urgent condition. Indications, review of the technique, clinical examples and limitations. Insights Imaging 4:185–198

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2006) Microbubble contrast for radiological imaging: 2 Applications. Ultrasound Q 22:15–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pinto F, Miele V, Scaglione M, Pinto A (2013) The use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in blunt abdominal trauma: advantages and limitations. Acta Radiol [Epub ahead of print]

  16. Madsen HHT (2008) Ultrasound contrast: the most important innovation in ultrasound in recent decades. Acta Radiol 49:247–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bauer A, Solbiati L, Weissman N (2002) Ultrasound imaging with SonoVue: low mechanical index real-time imaging. Acad Radiol 9(Suppl 2):S282–S284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mihalik JE, Smith RS, Toevs CC et al (2012) The use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of solid abdominal organ injury in patients with blunt abdominal trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 73:1100–1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wilson SR, Greenbaum LD, Goldberg BB (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: what is the evidence and what are the obstacles? AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:55–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Piscaglia F, Bolondi L (2006) The safety of Sonovue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23,188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol 32:1369–1375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bokor D, Chambers JB, Rees PJ et al (2001) Clinical safety of SonoVue, a new contrast agent for ultrasound imaging, in healthy volunteers and in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Invest Radiol 36:104–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Li W, Tang J, Lv F et al (2010) Effectiveness and safety of CEUS-guided haemostatic injection for blunt splenic trauma: an animal experiment. Radiol Med 115:1080–1086

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF et al (2011) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 32:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bolondi L, Correas JM, Lencioni R et al (2007) New perspectives for the use of contrast-enhanced liver ultrasound in clinical practice. Dig Liv Dis 39:187–195

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Catalano O, Cusati B, Nunziata A et al (2006) Active abdominal bleeding: contrast-enhanced sonography. Abdom Imaging 31:9–16

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Glen P, MacQuarrie J, Imrie CW, Leen E (2004) A novel application of ultrasound contrast: demonstration of splenic arterial bleeding. Br J Radiol 77:333–334

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lv F, Tang J, Luo Y et al (2011) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of active bleeding associated with hepatic and splenic trauma. Radiol Med 116:1076–1082

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Poletti PA, Platon A, Becker CD et al (2004) Blunt abdominal trauma: does the use of a second-generation sonographic contrast agent help to detect solid organ injuries? AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1293–1301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Valentino M, Serra C, Zironi G et al (2006) Blunt abdominal trauma: emergency contrast-enhanced sonography for detection of solid organ injuries. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1361–1367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Valentino M, Serra C, Pavlica P et al (2008) Blunt abdominal trauma: diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced US in children: initial experience. Radiology 246:903–909

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Regine G, Atzori M, Miele V et al (2007) Second-generation sonographic contrast agents in the evaluation of renal trauma. Radiol Med 112:581–587

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. McArthur C, Baxter GM (2012) Current and potential renal applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Clin Radiol 67:909–922

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Harvey CJ, Sidhu PS (2010) Ultrasound contrast agents in genitourinary imaging. Ultrasound Clin 5:489–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pinto F, Bode PJ, Tonerini M et al (2006) The role of the radiologist in the management of politrauma patients. Eur J Radiol 59:315–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mirvis SE (2000) Role of CT in diagnosis and management of spleen injury. Appl Radiol 29:7–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Harkanyi Z (2013) Potential applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in pediatric patients. Ultrasound Clin 8:403–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Piskunowicz M, Kosiak W, Batko T (2012) Intravenous application of second-generation ultrasound contrast agents in children: a review of the literature. Ultraschall Med 33:135–140

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Coleman JL, Navid F, Furman WL, McCarville MB (2014) Safety of ultrasound contrast agents in the pediatric oncologic population: a single-institution experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:966–970

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sellars ME, Deganello A, Sidhu PS (2014) Paediatric contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): a technique that requires co-operation for rapid implementation into clinical practice. Ultrascall Med 35:203–206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Darge K, Papadopoulou F, Ntoulia A et al (2013) Safety of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in children for non-cardiac applications: a review by the Society for Pediatric Radiology (SPR) and the International Contrast Ultrasound Society (ICUS). Pediatr Radiol 43:1063–1073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Romanini L, Passamonti M, Aiani L et al (2007) Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicenter Italian experience. Eur Radiol 17(Suppl 6):F99–F106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tranquart F, Correas JM, Ladam Marcus V et al (2009) Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of focal liver lesions: diagnostic efficacy and economical issues from a French multicentric study. J Radiol 90(1 Pt 2):109–122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Catalano O, Aiani L, Barozzi L et al (2009) CEUS in abdominal trauma: multi-center study. Abdom Imaging 34:225–234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Catalano O, Lobianco R, Sandomenico F et al (2004) Real-time, contrast-enhanced sonographic imaging in emergency radiology. Radiol Med 108:454–469

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Valentino M, Ansaloni L, Catena F et al (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in blunt abdominal trauma: considerations after 5 years of experience. Radiol Med 114:1080–1093

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Quaia E (2007) Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents: an update. Eur Radiol 17:1995–2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Moore EE, Cogbill TH, Jurkovich GJ et al (1995) Organ injury scaling: spleen and liver (1994 revision). J Trauma 38:323–324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Miele V, Buffa V, Stasolla A et al (2004) Contrast enhanced ultrasound with second generation contrast agent in traumatic liver lesions. Radiol Med 108:82–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tang J, Li W, Lv F et al (2009) Comparison of gray-scale contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with contrast-enhanced computed tomography in different grading of blunt hepatic and splenic trauma: an animal experiment. Ultrasound Med Biol 35:566–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Manetta R, Pistoia ML, Bultrini C et al (2009) Ultrasound enhanced with sulphur-hexafluoride-filled microbubbles agent (SonoVue) in the follow-up of mild liver and spleen trauma. Radiol Med 114:771–779

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Radiological Imaging, Marcianise Hospital, ASL Caserta, CE, Italy

    Fabio Pinto

  2. Diagnostic Radiology Department, S. Antonio Abate Hospital, Tolmezzo, UD, Italy

    Massimo Valentino

  3. Istituto di Radiologia, Policlinico S. Matteo, Universita’ di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Laura Romanini

  4. Istituto di Radiologia, Universita’ di Chieti, Chieti, Italy

    Raffaella Basilico

  5. UOC di Diagnostica per Immagini Cardiovascolare e d’Urgenza, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Camillo-Forlanini, Rome, Italy

    Vittorio Miele

Authors
  1. Fabio Pinto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Massimo Valentino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura Romanini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Raffaella Basilico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vittorio Miele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fabio Pinto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pinto, F., Valentino, M., Romanini, L. et al. The role of CEUS in the assessment of haemodynamically stable patients with blunt abdominal trauma. Radiol med 120, 3–11 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-014-0455-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-014-0455-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation