The Scout Film

  • Mary M. Salvatore
  • Ronaldo Collo Go
  • Monica A. Pernia M.


Six to eleven percent of important findings are excluded in the CT FOV, and 2% of these can be seen on the scout film, thus highlighting its importance [Johnson et al., AJR Am J Roentgenol. 202:1256–1263, 2014]. Leonard Berlin’s article, reviewing the CT scout view: medicolegal and ethical considerations, admits that the scout film is unlikely to demonstrate a significant abnormality; however, because 85 million CT scans are performed a year, the scout film could help to identify nearly 2.5 million abnormalities not included on the CT scan FOV [Berlin, AJR Am J Roentgenol. 202:1264–1266, 2014]. The value of the scout film cannot be overstated; it provides an overview of the patient’s condition. Review of the scout film helps you to identify lines and tubes that you may otherwise have ignored. Orthopedic hardware assessment is facilitated on the scout film as is foreign body recognition. Scoliosis can be measured on the scout film [Ho et al., Spine (Phila PA 1976). 17:771–774, 1992]. Diaphragmatic elevation can be quantified on this view.


Chest tube Central line Endotracheal tube Feeding tube Sternal wires 


  1. 1.
    Johnson PT, Scott WW, Gayler BW, Lewin JS, Fishman EK. The CT scout view: does it need to be routinely reviewed as part of the CT interpretation? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:1256–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berlin L. Reviewing the CT scout view: medicolegal and ethical considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(6):1264–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ho EK, Upadhyay SS, Ferris L, Chan FL, Bacon-Shone J, Hsu LC, Leong JC. A comparative study of computed tomographic and plain radiographic methods to measure vertebral rotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila PA 1976). 1992;17(7):771–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goodman LR, Conrardy PA, Laing F, Singer MM. Radiographic evaluation of endotracheal tube position. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1976;127(3):433–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pillai JB, Vegas A, Brister S. Thoracic complications of nasogastric tube: review of safe practice. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2005;4(5):429–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Funaki B. Central venous access: a primer for the diagnostic radiologist. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(2):309–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Godoy MC, Leitman BS, de Groot PM, Vlahos I, Naidich DP. Chest radiography in the ICU: part 1, evaluation of airway, enteric, and pleural tubes. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(3):563–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schimmer C, Reents W, Elert O. Primary closure of median sternotomy: a survey of all German surgical heart centers and a review of the literature concerning sternal closure technique. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;54(6):408–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharifi M, Inbar S, Neckels B, Shook H. Twiddling to the extreme: development of twiddler syndrome in an implanted cardioverter-defibrillator. J Invasive Cardiol. 2005;17(3):195–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yian EH, Werner CM, Nyffeler RW, Pfirrmann CW, Ramappa A, Sukthankar A, Gerber C. Radiographic and computed tomography analysis of cemented pegged polyethylene glenoid components in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(9):1928–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rao AG. Haller index in patients with pectus excavatum. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(5):W665. author reply W666.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Langensiepen S, Semler O, Sobottke R, Fricke O, Franklin J, Schönau E, Eysel P. Measuring procedures to determine the Cobb angle in idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(11):2360–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Katzman WB, Wanek L, Shepherd JA, Sellmeyer DE. Age-related hyperkyphosis: its causes, consequences, and management. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010;40(6):352–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iochum S, Ludig T, Walter F, Sebbag H, Grosdidier G, Blum AG. Imaging of diaphragmatic injury: a diagnostic challenge. Radiographics. 2002;22:S103–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaissert H, Wilcox SR. Diaphragmatic dysfunction after thoracic operations. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;64(8):621–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Verhey PT, Gosselin MV, Primack SL, Kraemer AC. Differentiating diaphragmatic paralysis and eventration. Acad Radiol. 2007;14(4):420–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary M. Salvatore
    • 1
  • Ronaldo Collo Go
    • 2
  • Monica A. Pernia M.
    • 3
  1. 1.RadiologyIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep MedicineCrystal Run Health CareMiddletownUSA
  3. 3.Internal MedicineNew York Medical College - Metropolitan Hospital ProgramNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations