• Journal of Trauma and Injury
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.135-142
• /
• 2018

Purpose: When hemodynamically unstable patients with blunt major trauma arrive at the emergency department (ED), the safety of performing early whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) is concerning. Some clinicians perform central venous catheterization (CVC) before WBCT (pre-computed tomography [CT] group) for hemodynamic stabilization. However, as no study has reported the factors affecting this decision, we compared clinical characteristics and outcomes of the pre- and post-CT groups and determined factors affecting this decision. Methods: This retrospective study included 70 hemodynamically unstable patients with chest or/and abdominal blunt injury who underwent WBCT and CVC between March 2013 and November 2017. Results: Univariate analysis revealed that the injury severity score, intubation, pulse pressure, focused assessment with sonography in trauma positivity score, and pH were different between the pre-CT (34 patients, 48.6%) and post-CT (all, p<0.05) groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that injury severity score (ISS) and intubation were factors affecting the decision to perform CVC before CT (p=0.003 and p=0.043). Regarding clinical outcomes, the interval from ED arrival to CT (p=0.011) and definite bleeding control (p=0.038), and hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay (p=0.018 and p=0.053) were longer in the pre-CT group than in the post-CT group. Although not significant, the pre-CT group had lower survival rates at 24 hours and 28 days than the post-CT group (p=0.168 and p=0.226). Conclusions: Clinicians have a tendency to perform CVC before CT in patients with blunt major trauma and high ISS and intubation.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.38 no.4
• /
• pp.214-227
• /
• 2013

Computed tomographic scan as a screening procedures in asymptomatic individuals has seen a steady increase with the introduction of multiple-raw detector CT scanners. This report provides a brief review of the current controversy surrounding CT cancer screening, with a focus on the radiation induced cancer risks and clinical efficacy. 1. A large study of patients at high risk of lung cancer(the National Lung Screening Trial[NLST]) showed that CT screening reduced cancer deaths by 20%(1.33% in those screened compared with 1.67% in those not screened). The rate of positive screening tests was 24.2% and 96.4% of the positive screening results in the low-dose CT group were false-positive. Radiation induced lung cancer risk was estimated the most important in screening population because ERR of radiation induced lung cancer does not show the decrease with increasing age and synergistic connection between smoking and radiation risk. Therefore, the radiation risk may be on the same order of magnitude as the benefit observed in the NLST. Optimal screening strategy remain uncertain, CT lung cancer screening is not yet ready for implementation. 2. Computed tomographic colonography is as good as colonoscopy for detecting colon cancer and is almost as good as colonoscopy for detecting advanced adenomas, but significantly less sensitive and specific for smaller lesions and disadvantageous for subsequent therapeutic optical colonoscopy if polyps are detected. The average effective dose from CT colonography was estimated 8-10 $mS{\nu}$, which could be a significant dose if administered routinely within the population over many years. CT colonography should a) achieve at least 90% sensitivity and specificity in the size category from 6 and 10 mm, b) offer non-cathartic bowl preparation and c) be optimized and standardized CT parameters if it is to be used for mass screening. 3. There is little evidence that demonstrates, for whole-body scanning, the benefit outweighs the detriment. This test found large portion of patient(86~90.8%) had at least one abnormal finding, whereas only 2% were estimated to have clinically significant disease. Annual scans from ages 45 to 75 years would accrue an estimated lifetime cancer mortality risk of 1.9%. There is no group within the medical community that recommends whole-body CT. No good studies indicate the accuracy of screening CT, at this time. The benefit/risk balance for any of the commonly suggested CT screening techniques has yet to be established. These areas need further research. Therefore wild screening should be avoided.