Trauma
Majid Zamani; Farhad Heydari; Mehrdad Esmailian
Volume 5, Issue 1 , January 2019, , Pages 14-18
Abstract
Objective: The present study examines the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal ultrasonography and urinalysis test in children with blunt abdominal trauma, compared with CT scan. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of ultrasound and urinalysis test with CT scan as a golden standard ...
Read More
Objective: The present study examines the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal ultrasonography and urinalysis test in children with blunt abdominal trauma, compared with CT scan. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of ultrasound and urinalysis test with CT scan as a golden standard diagnostic method in predicting abdominal peritoneal injury in these patients.Methods: This prospective study, based on diagnostic accuracy evaluation, was performed on children with blunt abdominal traumas less than 12 years of age who were referred to the emergency department from 2017-2018 and for whom abdominal ultrasonography, urinalysis and abdominal CT scans were requested. Demographic data, mechanism of trauma, the results of urine tests, ultrasound and CT scan of the abdomen were recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were used to measure the diagnostic power of the tests.Results: In this study, 100 children with multiple traumas were included. The mean age of these patients was 5.75 ± 3 years with a range of 1-12 years. In terms of sexual distribution, 69 (69%) were boys and 31 (31%) were girls. According to the results, ultrasound with an abnormal urinalysis test had sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 91.9%, positive predictive value of 63.2% and negative predictive value of 97.5%. The accuracy was 91%.Conclusion: According to the results of this study, the combination of ultrasonography and urinalysis resulted in a significant increase in diagnostic value (P <0.001). Pediatric patients with a negative ultrasonography and urinalysis test should be observed rather than subjected to the radiation risk of CT.
Trauma
Julius Gbenga Olaogun; Olusoga Olusola Akute; Amarachuku Chiduziem Etonyeaku; Joshua Taye Ige; David Brown Ajibola; Jide Michael Afolayan; Eyitayo Ebenezer Emmanuel
Volume 4, Issue 2 , July 2018, , Pages 67-72
Abstract
Objective: There has been a global increase in the incidence of abdominal trauma in surgical patients. We conducted this study to evaluate the pattern of abdominal injuries, patient characteristics and the management outcome in our setting.Methods: It was a descriptive (combined retrospective and prospective) ...
Read More
Objective: There has been a global increase in the incidence of abdominal trauma in surgical patients. We conducted this study to evaluate the pattern of abdominal injuries, patient characteristics and the management outcome in our setting.Methods: It was a descriptive (combined retrospective and prospective) study of all patients with abdominal trauma admitted and managed at Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital, Ado-Ekiti between January 2013 and December 2016. Data on socio-demographics, clinical profile, investigations, treatments and outcome were entered into a spread sheet and analyzed using SPSS version 20.0.Results: A total of 2728 trauma patients presented during the study period. Of these, 68 (2.5%) suffered from abdominal injuries. Their ages ranged from 6 to 72 years (mean 30.3±13.2). Fifty-nine (86.8%) were males while 9 (13.2%) were females (M: F ratio = 6.6:1). Forty-nine (72.1%) sustained blunt trauma while 19 (27.9%) had penetrating injuries. Road traffic incident (RTI) (n=41; 60.3%) was the most common source of trauma, followed by assault: gunshot (n=9; 13.2%), and stab (n=7; 10.3%). Spleen (n=23; 33.8%) was the most common solid organ injured followed by the liver (n=7; 10.3%) while small bowel (n=8; 11.8%) was the most common hollow viscous injured. Forty-seven (69.1%) required operative intervention. Post-operative complication rate was 17% with wound infection (12.5%) predominating. The mortality rate was 4 (5.9%).Conclusion: RTI and assault are major causes of abdominal injury. Measures to reduce RTI, youth restiveness and criminal activities will stem the tide.