Advertisement

Emergency Radiology

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 133–138 | Cite as

What is the added sensitivity of non-lateral cervical spine radiographs in the evaluation of acute cervical spine trauma?

  • Brian M. HaasEmail author
  • Lewis D. Hahn
  • Isabel Oliva
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Plain radiography of the cervical spine is used as a screening test for trauma patients. We evaluated the diagnostic yield of performing anteroposterior (AP), odontoid, and oblique views in addition to the lateral view in the current era when radiographs are performed only on low-risk patients.

Methods

All imaging reports from cervical spine radiography studies on patients aged 18 years and older in the emergency room of a major academic medical center between November 22, 2003, and January 17, 2012, were retrospectively reviewed. For the clinical workflow employed at the time of study acquisition, radiologists prospectively reviewed the lateral projection and subsequently reviewed the entirety of the images obtained. Exam reports and, when necessary, images were reviewed to determine which patients had fractures and on which projection the fractures were identified.

Results

Six fractures were detected in 7218 exams. Three of these fractures were identified on the lateral radiograph, and three of these fractures were visualized on the additional projections (two on oblique and one on odontoid views). The yield of the additional projections is one fracture per 9713 radiographic projections (90% confidence interval of one fracture per 1245–47,946 examinations). For two of the patients with fractures identified on the lateral projection, an additional fracture was seen when CT was then performed.

Conclusions

Performing additional radiographs of the cervical spine including AP, odontoid, and bilateral oblique projections in trauma patients with low pretest probability of fracture augments the diagnostic yield of lateral radiographs. Considering the potential for devastating neurological outcomes from missed cervical fractures, addition of AP, odontoid, and oblique projections continues to detect fractures at a low rate.

Keywords

Cervical radiography Spine trauma Cervical fracture Cervical spine CT 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Yale University institutional review board approved this HIPAA compliant study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Stiell IG, Clement CM, McKnight RD et al (2003) The Canadian C-spine rule versus the NEXUS low-risk criteria in patients with trauma. N Engl J Med 349:2510–2518.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa031375 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Riggins RS, Kraus JF (1977) The risk of neurologic damage with fractures of the vertebrae. J Trauma 17:126–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reid DC, Henderson R, Saboe L, Miller JD (1987) Etiology and clinical course of missed spine fractures. J Trauma 27:980–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daffner RH, Hackney DB (2007) ACR Appropriateness Criteria® on suspected spine trauma. J Am Coll Radiol 4:762–775.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2007.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gan G, Harkey P, Hemingway J, Hughes DR, Duszak R Jr (2016) Changing utilization patterns of cervical spine imaging in the emergency department: perspectives from two decades of national Medicare claims. J Am Coll Radiol 13:644–648.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fell M (2011) Cervical spine trauma radiographs: swimmers and supine obliques; an exploration of current practice. Radiography 17:33–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2010.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freemyer B, Knopp R, Piche J, Wales L, Williams J (1989) Comparison of five-view and three-view cervical spine series in the evaluation of patients with cervical trauma. Ann Emerg Med 18:818–821.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644(89)80203-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Silva CT, Doria AS, Traubici J, Moineddin R, Davila J, Shroff M (2010) Do additional views improve the diagnostic performance of cervical spine radiography in pediatric trauma? Am J Roentgenol 194:500–508.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2837 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shaffer MA, Doris PE (1981) Limitation of the cross table lateral view in detecting cervical spine injuries: a retrospective analysis. Ann Emerg Med 10:508–513.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644(81)80004-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Turetsky DB, Vines FS, Clayman DA, Northup HM (1993) Technique and use of supine oblique views in acute cervical spine trauma. Ann Emerg Med 22:685–689.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-0644(05)81848-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mower WR, Hoffman JR, Pollack CV Jr, Pollack CV Jr, Zucker MI, Browne BJ, Wolfson AB, NEXUS Group (2001) Use of plain radiography to screen for cervical spine injuries. Ann Emerg Med 38:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1067/mem.2001.115946 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Offerman SR, Holmes JF, Katzberg RX, Richards JR (2006) Utility of supine oblique radiographs in detecting cervical spine injury. J Emerg Med 30:189–195.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2005.05.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bailitz J, Starr F, Beecroft M, Bankoff J, Roberts R, Bokhari F, Joseph K, Wiley D, Dennis A, Gilkey S, Erickson P, Raksin P, Nagy K (2009) CT should replace three-view radiographs as the initial screening test in patients at high, moderate, and low risk for blunt cervical spine injury: a prospective comparison. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care 66:1605–1609.  https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181a5b0cc CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berlin L (2003) CT versus radiography for initial evaluation of cervical spine trauma: what is the standard of care? Am J Roentgenol 180:911–915.  https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.180.4.1800911 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holmes JF, Akkinepalli R (2005) Computed tomography versus plain radiography to screen for cervical spine injury: a meta-analysis. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care 58:902–905.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.TA.0000162138.36519.2A CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gale SC, Gracias VH, Reilly PM, Schwab CW (2005) The inefficiency of plain radiography to evaluate the cervical spine after blunt trauma. J Trauma 59:1121–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simpson AK, Whang PG, Jonisch A, Haims A, Grauer JN (2008) The radiation exposure associated with cervical and lumbar spine radiographs. J Spinal Disord Tech 21:409–412.  https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181568656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Griffey RT, Sodickson A (2009) Cumulative radiation exposure and cancer risk estimates in emergency department patients undergoing repeat or multiple CT. Am J Roentgenol 192:887–892.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1351 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Emergency Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Biomedical ImagingUniversity of California, San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  3. 3.Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of MedicineYale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations