OPEN IN READ APP
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Hand-held thoracic sonography for detecting post-traumatic pneumothoraces: the Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (EFAST)

A W Kirkpatrick, M Sirois, K B Laupland, D Liu, K Rowan, C G Ball, S M Hameed, R Brown, R Simons, S A Dulchavsky, D R Hamiilton, S Nicolaou
Journal of Trauma 2004, 57 (2): 288-95
15345974

BACKGROUND: Thoracic ultrasound (EFAST) has shown promise in inferring the presence of post-traumatic pneumothoraces (PTXs) and may have a particular value in identifying occult pneumothoraces (OPTXs) missed by the AP supine chest radiograph (CXR). However, the diagnostic utility of hand-held US has not been previously evaluated in this role.

METHODS: Thoracic US examinations were performed during the initial resuscitation of injured patients at a provincial trauma referral center. A high frequency linear transducer and a 2.4 kg US attached to a video-recorder were used. Real-time EFAST examinations for PTXs were blindly compared with the subsequent results of CXRs, a composite standard (CXR, chest and abdominal CT scans, clinical course, and invasive interventions), and a CT gold standard (CT only). Charts were reviewed for in-hospital outcomes and follow-up.

RESULTS: There were 225 eligible patients (207 blunt, 18 penetrating); 17 were excluded from the US examination because of battery failure or a lost probe. Sixty-five (65) PTXs were detected in 52 patients (22% of patients), 41 (63%) being occult to CXR in 33 patients (14.2% whole population, 24.6% of those with a CT). The US and CXR agreed in 186 (89.4%) of patients, EFAST was better in 16 (7.7%), and CXR better in 6 (2.9%). Compared with the composite standard, the sensitivity of EFAST was 58.9% with a likelihood ratio of a positive test (LR+) of 69.7 and a specificity of 99.1%. Comparing EFAST directly to CXR, by looking at each of 266 lung fields with the benefit of the CT gold standard, the EFAST showed higher sensitivity over CXR (48.8% versus 20.9%). Both exams had a very high specificity (99.6% and 98.7%), and very predictive LR+ (46.7 and 36.3).

CONCLUSION: EFAST has comparable specificity to CXR but is more sensitive for the detection of OPTXs after trauma. Positive EFAST findings should be addressed either clinically or with CT depending on hemodynamic stability. CT should be used if detection of all PTXs is desired.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Available on the App Store

Available on the Play Store
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
15345974
×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"