Clearance of the cervical spine in multitrauma patients: The role of advanced imaging

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-2171(01)90023-XGet rights and content

Abstract

The cervical spine is injured in 3% of major trauma patients. Radiographic clearance for injury must be provided efficiently and accurately. There are numerous choices for clearance that are now in clinical practice: lateral radiograph only, 3-view or 5-view cervical-spine (c-spine) series, flexion-extension radiographs, computed tomography (CT) with multiplanar reformations, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This article reviews the literature on methods of c-spine clearance, and emphasizes the pitfalls of each modality. Although lateral radiographs detect 60% to 80% of c-spine fractures, a significant number of fractures are not visible, even when three views of the spine are obtained. The sensitivity of plain radiographs can be improved by attention to several subtle features, which are discussed. Flexion-extension radiographs in the acute setting have an unacceptably high false-negative and false-positive rate. CT detects 97% to 100% of fractures, but its accuracy in detection of purely ligamentous injuries has not been documented. Furthermore, CT is limited in patients with severe degenerative disease. MRI is highly sensitive in the detection of ligamentous injury, but not all cases of injury may cause instability. MRI is also much less sensitive than CT to fractures of the posterior elements of the spine, and to injuries of the craniocervical junction. The causes of missed cervical spine injury and delayed instability are discussed and shown in this article. An algorithm for the use of advanced imaging is proposed.

References (52)

  • AM Scarrow et al.

    Cervical spine evaluation in obtunded or comatose pediatric trauma patients: A pilot study

    Pediatr Neurosurg

    (1999)
  • DC Reid et al.

    Etiology and clinical course of missed spine fractures

    J Trauma

    (1977)
  • JW Davis et al.

    The etiology of missed cervical spine injury

    J Trauma

    (1993)
  • B Gerrelts et al.

    Delayed diagnosis of cervical spine injuries

    J Trauma

    (1991)
  • JH Woodring et al.

    Limitations of cervical radiography in the evaluation of acute cervical trauma

    J Trauma

    (1993)
  • Brodke DS, Harris M: Subaxial cervical trauma: Evaluation and management options. Semin Spine Surgery (in...
  • R Roaf

    A study of the mechanics of spinal injury

    J Bone Joint Surg Br

    (1960)
  • F Holdsworth

    Fractures, dislocations, and fracture dislocations of the spine

    J Bone Joint Surg Am

    (1970)
  • F Denis

    The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoraco-lumbar spine injuries

    Spine

    (1983)
  • A White et al.

    Clnical Biomechanics of the Spine

    (1990)
  • BJ Ringenberg et al.

    Rational ordering of cervical spine radiographs following trauma

    Ann Emerg Med

    (1998)
  • RM Vandemark

    Radiology of the cervical spine in trauma patients: Practice pitfalls and recommendations for improving efficiency and communication

    AJR Am J Roentgenol

    (1990)
  • CC Blackmore et al.

    Cervical spine imaging in patients with trauma: Determination of fracture risk to optimize use

    Radiology

    (1999)
  • OC West et al.

    Acute cervical spine trauma: Diagnostic performance of single-view versus three-view radiographic screening

    Radiology

    (1997)
  • DB Nunez et al.

    Cervical spine trauma: How much more do we learn by routinely using helical CT?

    Radiographics

    (1996)
  • PA Templeton et al.

    The value of retropharyngeal soft tissue measurements in trauma of the adult cervical spine

    Skeletal Radiol

    (1987)
  • Cited by (84)

    • Effect of Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Surgical Approach and Outcomes in the Management of Subaxial Cervical Fractures

      2020, World Neurosurgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Surgical approach (anterior, posterior, or combined anteroposterior) is dictated in accordance with fracture morphology, degree of instability, cord compression, and patient-specific factors.8 Computed tomography (CT) is the initial imaging modality used to assess cervical spine instability, because of its high sensitivity and specificity in delineating bony disease, detecting 97%ā€“100% of cervical fractures.9,10 Although CT imaging identifies bony disease with high sensitivity and specificity, it lacks the ability to highlight soft tissue injury, unlike magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which provides increased sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy regarding soft tissue (ligamentous, muscular, or discogenic) injury and spinal cord injury (SCI).5,9,11-13

    • Acute management of cervical spine trauma

      2018, Handbook of Clinical Neurology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Spinal instability, malalignment, and fracture must all be ruled out prior to obtaining flexionā€“extension views (McCracken et al., 2013). Although useful as an initial screening tool, radiography alone can still miss a significant number of cervical spine injuries (Cornelius, 2001; Crim et al., 2001; Taneja et al., 2009). When plain films are negative but suspicion remains high, the next diagnostic step is computed tomography (CT).

    • PMCT findings of intervertebral separation

      2014, Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging
      Citation Excerpt :

      Consequently, vertebral ligament injury should not be overlooked. Vertebral fractures are usually identified not only at autopsy but also on computed tomography (CT) because the fracture line or vertebral collapse is clearly visualised in almost all cases on CT [3,7ā€“11]. Ligament injuries can be detected easily by autopsy, because one can recognize a clear haemorrhage around the lesions.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text