Blunt Cerebrovascular Injury, Diagnosis and Management of
Archived PMG
Published 2007
Citation: J Trauma. 2010 Feb; 68 (2): 471-7
Authors
EAST Practice Management Guidelines Committee
William J. Bromberg, MD, chair, brombwi1@memorialhealth.com
Bryan Collier, DO, vice-chair, Bryan.collier@vanderbilt.edu
Larry Diebel, MD, ldiebel@med.wayne.edu
Kevin Dwyer, MD, Kevin.dwyer@inova.com
Michelle Holevar, MD, Michellehmail-career@yahoo.com
David Jacobs, MD, David.jacobs@carolinashelathcare.org
Stanley Kurek, DO, SKurek@mc.utmck.edu
Martin Schreiber, MD, schreibm@ohsu.edu
Mark Shapiro, MD, Mark.shapiro@umassmed.edu
Todd Vogel, MD, Todd.vogel@vanderilt.edu
Scope of the Problem
Blunt injury to the carotid or vertebral vessels (blunt cerebrovascular injury – BCVI) is diagnosed in approximately 1/1000 (0.1%) patients hospitalized for trauma in the United States.[1] However the vast majority of these injuries are diagnosed following the development of symptoms secondary to central nervous system ischemia with a resultant neurologic morbidity of up to 80% and associated mortality of up to 40%.2 When asymptomatic patients are screened for BCVI the incidence rises to 1% of all blunt trauma patients.3 Key issues that need to be addressed in the diagnosis and management of BCVI include what population (if any) merits screening for asymptomatic injury, what screening modality is best, what is the appropriate treatment for BCVI (both symptomatic and asymptomatic) and what constitutes appropriate follow-up for these injuries.
Process
Identification of references
A computerized search of the National Library of Medicine/National Institute of Health, Medline database was performed utilizing citations from 1965 to 2005 inclusive. The search terms “cerebrovascular trauma,” or “carotid artery” or “vertebral artery” AND wounds and injuries (mesh heading), AND “blunt” limited to the English language returned approximately 1500 citations. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to determine relevance and isolated case reports, small case series, editorials, letters to the editor, and review articles were eliminated. The bibliographies of the resulting full text articles were searched for other relevant citations and these were obtained when appropriate. One hundred sixty two articles were selected for review and of these 60 met criteria for inclusion and are excerpted in the attached evidentiary table.
Quality of the references
The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma “Utilizing Evidence Based Outcome Measures to Develop Practice Management Guidelines: A Primer” was utilized as the quality assessment instrument applied to the development of this protocol.4 Articles were classified as Class I, II, or III according to the following definitions:
Class I: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial (there were no Class I articles reviewed)
Class II: Clinical studies in which the data was collected prospectively, and retrospective analyses which were based on clearly reliable data. Types of studies so classified include: observational studies, cohort studies, prevalence studies, and case control studies. There were 23 Class II studies identified.
Class III: Studies based on retrospectively collected data. Evidence used in this class includes clinical series, database or registry reviews, large series of case reviews, and expert opinion. There were 37 Class III studies identified.
Establishment of recommendations
A committee consisting of 10 trauma surgeons was convened to review the data and establish these recommendations using these definitions:[5]
Level 1: The recommendation is convincingly justifiable based on the available scientific information alone. This recommendation is usually based on Class I data, however strong Class II evidence may form the basis for a Level 1 recommendation, especially if the issue does not lend itself to testing in a randomized format. Conversely, low quality or contradictory Class I data may not be able to support a Level 1 recommendation.
No Level 1 guidelines were supported by the literature.
Level 2: The recommendation is reasonably justifiable by available scientific evidence and strongly supported by expert opinion. This recommendation is usually supported by Class II data or a preponderance of Class III evidence.
Seven Level 2 guidelines were establish by the literature.
Level 3: The recommendation is supported by available data but adequate scientific evidence is lacking. This recommendation is generally supported by Class III data. This type of recommendation is useful for educational purposes and in guiding future clinical research.
Nine Level 3 guidelines are proposed for this topic.
Recommendations
Question addressed: What patients should be screened for blunt cerebrovascular injury?
Level 1: No Level 1 recommendations can be made.
Level 2:
- Patients presenting with any neurologic abnormality that is unexplained by a diagnosed injury should be evaluated for BCVI.
- Blunt trauma patients presenting with epistaxis from a suspected arterial source following trauma should be evaluated for BCVI.
Level 3:
- Asymptomatic patients with significant blunt head trauma as defined below are at significantly increased risk for BCVI and screening should be considered. Risk factors:
- GCS ≤8
- Petrous bone fracture
- Diffuse axonal injury
- Cervical spine fracture
- Fracture through the foramen transversum
- Lefort II or III facial fractures
- Pediatric trauma patients should be evaluated using the same criteria as the adult population.
Question addressed: What is the appropriate modality for the screening and diagnosis of BCVI?
Level 1: No Level 1 recommendations can be made.
Level 2:
- Diagnostic four vessel cerebral angiography (FVCA) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of BCVI.
- Duplex ultrasound is not adequate for screening for BCVI.
- CT angiography with a 4 (or less)-slice multidetector array is neither sensitive nor specific enough for screening for BCVI.
Level 3:
- Multi-slice (8 or greater) multidetector CTA has the same rate of detection for BCVI when compared to historic control rates of diagnosis with FVCA and should be considered as a screening modality in place of FVCA.
Question: How should BCVI be treated? This references a grading scheme proposed by Biffl et al.[6]
Grading scale
- Grade I – intimal irregularity with <25% narrowing
- Grade II – dissection or intramural hematoma with >25% narrowing
- Grade III – pseudoaneurysm
- Grade IV – occlusion
- Grade V – transection with extravasation
Level 1: No Level 1 recommendations can be made.
Level 2:
- Barring contraindications, Grade I and II injuries should be treated with antithrombotic agents such as aspirin or heparin.
Level 3:
- 1 Either heparin or antiplatelet therapy can be used with seemingly equivalent results. A number of authors still recommend heparinization if there is no contraindication, reserving anti-platelet agents for those patients with relative contraindications to heparinization.
- If heparin is selected for treatment, the infusion should be started without a bolus and titrated to an aPTT of 50–60 sec.
- In patients in whom anticoagulant therapy is chosen conversion to warfarin titrated to a PT INR of 2-3 for 3-6 months is recommended.
- Grade III injuries (pseudoaneurysm) rarely resolve with observation or heparinization and invasive therapy (surgery or angio-interventional) should be considered. N.B. carotid stents placed without subsequent anti-platelet therapy have been noted to have a high rate of thrombosis in this population.[7]
- In patients with an early neurologic deficit and an accessible carotid lesion operative or interventional repair should be considered to restore flow.
- In children who have suffered an ischemic neurologic event, aggressive management of resulting intracranial hypertension up to and including resection of ischemic brain tissue has improved outcome as compared to adults and should be considered for supportive management.
Question addressed: For how long should antithrombotic therapy be administered?
No recommendations can be made for this question.
Question addressed: How should one monitor the response to therapy?
Level 1: No Level 1 recommendation can be made.
Level 2:
- Follow-up angiography is recommended in Grade I-III injuries. In order to reduce the incidence of angiography-related complications this should be performed after 7 days post injury.
Level 3: There are no Level 3 guidelines for this question.
Scientific Foundation
Screening and Diagnosis
Symptomatic patients that undergo FVCA for the indications of unexplained neurologic symptoms or arterial epistaxis the diagnosis of BCVI is made in a significant percentage of cases (38–100%) and is clearly recommended as a reason to pursue the diagnosis.[8][9][10]
Screening asymptomatic patients at risk for BCVI is more controversial. Multiple studies have indicated that patients with BCVI often present hours to days prior to the onset of symptoms.[11][12][13] Failure to identify and treat these injuries can result in significant mortality and morbidity.[14] It is clear that screening for BCVI by essentially any modality can diagnosis BCVI prior to the onset of symptoms at rates up to 10 times higher than previously identified.[15] On the basis of this data a number of individuals recommend screening blunt trauma patients at risk for BCVI using 4-vessel cerebral angiography as the diagnostic modality.[16][17][18][19] There is some countervailing opinion.
In a database review of thirty-five thousand patients Mayberry determined that only 17 were diagnosed with BCI of which 11 became symptomatic. Of these only 2 were asymptomatic for over 2 hours post admission, and of these 2, only 1 met criteria for screening. Based on this data Mayberry et al concluded that screening was futile in light of the inability to diagnose the injury prior to the development of symptoms.[20] The majority of the available data does not support this finding. The preponderance of the evidence supports the recommendation that patients at risk for BCVI can be identified and diagnosed prior to the onset of symptoms with the application of an appropriate screening modality.
Criteria for screening/Risk factors
The mechanism of BCVI seems to be associated with cervical hyperextension and rotation, hyperflexion, or direct blow.[21] The factors that are most closely associated with the finding of BCVI are direct evidence of neurologic deficits as noted above. In asymptomatic patients a number of factors have been associated with increased risk of BCVI. Biffl and colleagues performed linear regression analysis of a liberally screened patient population (N =249)and found that there were four independent risk factors for BCAI. These were: 1) GCS<6, 2) Petrous fracture, 3) Diffuse axonal injury, and 4) LeFort II or III fracture. Patients who had one risk factor had a risk of 41% for BCAI. This risk increased to 93% in the presence of all 4 factors. The only risk factor for BVAI was presence of cervical spine fracture. However 20% of patients diagnosed with BCVI selected for screening by the criteria in Table 1 did not have the independent risk factors identified by regression analysis indicating that broad selection criteria are necessary to prevent missed injuries.[22] Cothren retrospectively reviewed patients with BVAI and found that complex cervical spine fractures involving subluxation, fracture into the foramen transversarium, or C1 to C3 fractures were closely associated with this injury.[23] In a prospective review of screening with DFVCA Cothren et al utilized criteria similar to that proposed by Biffl and modified to incorporate those specific cervical spine fracture patterns shown to increase risk of BVAI to select patients for evaluation (Table 2). Seven hundred and twenty-seven patients (4.6%) of all blunt trauma patients were studied and 244 were diagnosed with BCVI for a screening yield of 34%.[24] An isolated cervical seat belt sign without other risk factors and normal physical exam has failed to be identified as an independent risk factor in two retrospective studies and should not be utilized as the sole criteria to stratify patients for screening.[25][26]
Table 1
Injury mechanism
Fracture in proximity to internal carotid or vertebral artery
|
Table 2
Signs/symptoms of BCVI
Risk factors for BCVI
|
Screening Modality
Duplex Sonography
Multiple studies have shown that duplex sonography is not sensitive enough for screening for BCVI with an overall sensitivity from as low as 38.5%[27] to as high as 86% (the latter for carotid injuries alone).[28][29] Duplex US cannot be recommended as a screening modality for BCVI.
Angiography
Arguments have been made that DFVCA, in an appropriate group is safe, sensitive, and cost effective. Biffl et al report a 27% rate of positive screening angiogram when asymptomatic patients were screened according to the criteria in Table 1.[30] Cothren[31] utilized DFVCA in 727 asymptomatic patients that met screening criteria (Table 2) in which he found 244 patients with injury (34% screening yield). In patients who were initially asymptomatic and could not have antithrombotic therapy there was a 21% (10/48) rate of ischemic neurologic event (INE) whereas in those treated with either heparin, low molecular weight heparin, or antiplatelet agents only one of 187 had an INE. Using this internal data Cothren estimated that the identification and treatment of asymptomatic BCVI in these 187 patients prevented 32 strokes. This comes at an expense (charge data) of $6500 per angiogram for a total of approx. $154 000 per stroke avoided. Cothren concludes that this is cost-effective and screening with DFVCA should be pursued. The argument against the utilization of DFVCA (aside from that against screening per se) is that it is expensive (approx $1500)[32], carries an inherent risk of stroke (1–2%)[33] and is impractical to apply at many institutions.[34]
Magnetic Resonance Angiography
In so far as MRA is non-invasive and requires no contrast administration MRA/MRI has been gaining popularity as an alternative to DFVCA for the diagnosis of BCVI. Although a number of studies describe the use of MRA to identify BCVI[35][36][37][38] at this time the few direct studies that do exist indicate that sensitivity and specificity is significantly lower than that of DFVCA. In a (albeit small) direct comparison of MRA vs. angiography Miller et al found a sensitivity of 50% for CAI and 47% for VAI.[39] Levy also reported a significantly lower sensitivity for MRI and MRA than angiography for the diagnosis of BCVI.[40] It seems that, based on this data MRA cannot be recommended as the sole modality for the screening of BCVI.
Computed Tomographic Angiography
Early CT angiography with 1 to 4 slice scanners is not sensitive enough to qualify as an adequate screening modality for BCVI. In a prospective study of CTA on a single slice scanner vs. DFVA Biffl et al report a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 67% respectively.[41] Similarly Miller et al compared 4-slice CTA vs. DFVCA and showed that CTA performed poorly with a sensitivity of 47% for CAI and 53% for VAI.[42] Sensitivity and specificity seems to improve in direct relationship to improvements in technology, however. In a prospective study which included images obtained from single, four and eight-slice scanners Bub reports improvement in image quality and concomitant improvement in sensitivity and specificity as the number of detectors increases. The overall results for the mixed population (reported as ranges from different observers) was 83–92% sensitivity and 88–92% specificity for the carotid artery and 50–60% sensitivity and 90–97% specificity for the vertebral artery.[43] Berne et al screened patients with 4-slice and, later, 16-slice scanner CTA in a study in which only positive CTA studies underwent confirmatory angiography showing an overall sensitivity (for symptomatic BCVI) and specificity of 100% and 94% respectively. Interestingly the incidence of BCVI detected went up from 0.6% with the earlier machine to 1.05% with the newer device, approaching historic incidence of BCVI as diagnosed by DFVCA and the comparative specificity improved from 90.8% to 98.7%.[44] In a follow-up study Berne et al screened patients for BCVI solely with a 16-slice scanner. In this prospective study Berne showed that the detected incidence of BCVI goes up threefold when changing from a 4-slice scanner to a 16-slice scanner with a resulting incidence of 1.2% which is similar to that found by screening with DFVCA.[45] In a similar study in which only positive 16-slice CTA studies were followed by DFVCA, Biffl et al reversed an earlier recommendation[46] that CTA was not adequate for screening for BCVI reporting a sensitivity of 100% for symptomatic BCVI.[47] Schneidereit and colleagues report similar findings and give a diagnosed incidence for BCVI of 1.4% using a 16-slice scanner.[48] Although these studies are interesting obviously a true sensitivity can only be obtained via direct comparison between CTA and DFVCA. At this time only one study has directly compared 16-slice CTA vs. angiography for screening for BCVI. Eastman et al performed 162 CTAs followed by 146 confirmatory DFVA studies (12 patients refused consent, 4 were discharged, and 6 died of non-neurologic causes prior to the study being obtained). Twenty carotid injuries and 26 vertebral artery injuries were identified with one false negative CTA (a grade I vertebral artery injury) for a screened population incidence of 28.4% and an overall incidence of 1.25%. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 97.7%, 100% 100%, 99.3%, and 99.3% respectively.[49]
Blunt cerebrovascular injuries in children: There is a relative paucity of information on the screening, diagnosis, and management of BCVI in children and what is available primarily consists of isolated case reports and small case series. In one review of the National Pediatric Trauma Registry (NPTR) Lew and colleagues found an overall incidence of 0.03%, which is lower than that of the adult trauma population and speculated that it may be due to the increased elasticity of the younger children’s blood vessels. They did note that another possibility was that the difference was secondary to decreased detection in children and the retrospective nature of the study. Children under six years of age seemed to be at higher risk, making up 73% of patients with BCVI whereas they made up only 36% of the registry patients. Chest trauma (in particular clavicle fracture) and severe head injury (basilar skull fracture, intracranial hemorrhage) were associated with a higher risk of BCVI in the pediatric population.[50] In a case review of 5 patients with BCI Duke and Partington[51] recommend initial treatment of the arterial injury to be the same as in adults. Where recommendations differ is that they go on to recommend aggressive management of intracranial hypertension in children up to and including resection of infracted tissue due to improved outcome in pediatric patients in contradistinction to the dismal outcome of post-ischemic intracranial hypertension in adults.
Treatment of BCVI
Surgery—a number of studies from the 80’s and 90’s have concluded that if individuals have minimal or no symptoms and an accessible carotid lesion they do well with operative intervention and therefore recommend repair of any more than minor intimal irregularities.[52][53][54] However most of these studies also note that if patient present with profound neurologic deficit, revascularization does not improve outcome. In all studies that have compared ligation v. repair, those patients that do not have a profound deficit do much better with repair.[55][56] Karlin for example found a 7.8% mortality in patients undergoing repair v. 50% in those undergoing ligation and that, furthermore, those patients who did not have a deficit prior to surgery did not develop one if revascularized.[57] Finally a vast majority of these studies including Richardson58 indicate that if the patient presents with a dense neurologic deficit, neither operation nor anticoagulation improves outcome. All of these studies however were of Class III quality.
Anticoagulation—there have been a number of studies attempting to evaluate the impact of antithrombotic agents on the progression or development of sequellae of BCVI. As is not unexpected the results have been somewhat contradictory but the weight of the evidence seems to support the administration of antithrombotic agents to those patients with BCVI who do not have contraindications for such. A series of retrospective studies[59][60][61][62] found that administration of antithrombotic agents reduces the rate of neurologic sequellae after BCVI. Fabian also indicated that mortality also improves with heparinization in this population. Although there has not been a direct, controlled comparison of heparinization vs. antiplatelet agents (aspirin or clopidigrel) in the prevention of CVA after BCVI, a number of studies performed subgroup analysis in an attempt to address this question. In one of these studies Biffl63 compared those patients treated with ASA v. heparin and found a trend towards reduction in CVA for those treated with heparin (1% v. 9% p=0.07) however in studies by Wahl,[64] Cothren,[65] and a second study by Biffl,[66] failed to demonstrate a difference in outcome between the two modalities. In these previously mentioned studies both Cothren and Biffl still recommend heparinization as first line therapy for those patients without contraindications, reserving antiplatelet agents for those not deemed to be candidates for anticoagulation.
Serious bleeding complications can accompany aggressive anticoagulation regimens. In a mixed population of patients with both blunt and penetrating carotid injury Nanda[67] found that, in patients with a pre-existing intra-cerebral hemorrhage, anticoagulation resulted in worsening in 2/3. Extracranial hemorrhage is another frequent complication of systemic heparinization in polytrauma patients. For example in a previously mentioned study Biffl[68] noted that bleeding which required either transfusion or cessation of heparin was encountered in 54% of patients prompting him to recommend a conservative protocol for the initiation and maintenance of the heparin infusion and tight control of aPTT to within 40–50 seconds in a later study.[69]
Angiointerventional therapy—There have been several preliminary, Class III studies that have indicated the safety and feasibility of catheter directed therapy to include embolization of pseudoaneurysms and stenting of intimal injuries.[70][71][72][73] A more recent Class II study by Cothren[74] indicated that the carotid artery occlusion rate in patients who underwent stenting is much higher than that of patients with BCAI who were treated with antithrombotic agents alone. This resulted in a rate of complications (3 CVA and one subclavian artery dissection) of 21% in stented patients v. 5% in non¬stented patients (no one who was received anticoagulation suffered a CVA). The author goes on to add that the reason for this may be that patients who had undergone stenting were then treated with heparin and not anti-platelet agents and recommends a study to evaluate this.
Monitoring response to therapy—In a Class II study, Biffl[75] found that follow-up angiography changes management in 61% of BCVI, particularly in that Grade 1 and 2 injuries often go on to complete healing or to form a pseudoaneurysm within 7–10 days. The author went on to note that the complication rate of angiography was significantly higher if the follow-up procedure was performed within 7 days and recommends that at least that amount of time be allowed to lapse prior to follow-up angiography.
Future Directions
Screening—Blunt cerebrovascular injury is a rare entity (though not as rare as formerly thought), which requires a high index of suspicion to identify prior to the onset of symptoms. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of a screening program depends on both disease-specific, test specific, and organizational issues as well as the utility (or futility) of the treatment modalities available. Further prospective investigation is necessary to further refine the screening criteria so as to maximize the disease incidence in the screened population which will increase accuracy and decrease costs.
Treatment—the optimum modality for the treatment of BCVI is as yet undetermined. Prospective studies will be necessary to compare invasive intervention v. anticoagulation. Furthermore the optimal anticoagulation regimen is as yet unknown in terms of agent (anti-platelet v. heparinoid v. warfarin) as well as the duration and endpoint of therapy. Cleary there is room for further study in this regard. In light of the relative rarity of the disease entity, systematic, multi-institutional studies will be required to answer this question.
References
- Cogbill TH, Moore EE, Meissner M, et al. The spectrum of blunt injury to the carotid artery: A multicenter perspective. J Trauma 1994; 37:473–47p
- Davis JW, Holbrook TL, Hoyt DB, et al. Blunt carotid artery dissection: incidence, associated injuries, screening and treatment. J Trauma. 1990;30:1514–1517
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Ryu RK, et al. The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: Early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surgery 1998;228:462–470
- EAST Ad Hoc Committee on Practice Management Guideline Development. Utilizing evidence based outcome measures to develop practice management guidelines: A primer. 2000 Available at: http://www.east.org/tgp/primer.pdf. Accessed Jan 2006.
- EAST Ad Hoc Committee on Practice Management Guideline Development. Utilizing evidence based outcome measures to develop practice management guidelines: A primer. 2000 Available at: http://www.east.org/tgp/primer.pdf. Accessed Jan 2006.
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Offner PJ, et al. Blunt carotid arterial injuries: Implications of a new grading scale. J Trauma. 1999;47:845–853
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Ray CE, et al. Carotid artery stents for blunt cerebrovascular injury: Risks exceed benefits. Arch Surg. 2005;140:480–486
- Sanzone AG, Torres J, Doundoulakis SH. Blunt trauma to the carotid arteries. Am J Emerg Med. 1994;13:327–330
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Offner PJ, et al. Optimizing screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:517–522
- Waltridge CB, Muhlbauer MS, Lowery RD. Traumatic carotid artery dissection: Diagnosis and treatment. J Neurosurg. 1989;71:854
- Batnitzky S, Price HI, Holden RW, Franken EA. Cervical internal carotid artery injuries due to blunt trauma. AJNR 1983;4:292–295
- Fakhry SM, Jaques PF, Proctor JH. Cervical vessel injury after blunt trauma. J Vasc Surg. 1998;8:501–508
- Ahmad HA, Gerraty RP, Davis SM, Cameron PA. Cervicocerebral artery dissections. J Accid Emerg Med. 1999;16:422–424
- Berne JD, Norwood SH, McAuley CE, et al. The high morbidity of blunt cerebrovascular injury in an unscreened population: More evidence of the need for mandatory screening protocols. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:314–321
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Ryu RK, et al. The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: Early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surgery 1998;228:462–470
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Ryu RK, et al. The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: Early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surgery 1998;228:462–470
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Ray CE Jr, et al. Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries is cost effective. Am J Sgy. 2005;190:845–849
- Fabian TC, Patton JH, Croce MA, et al. Blunt carotid injury: Importance of early diagnosis and anticoagulant therapy. Ann Sgy. 1996;223:513–525
- Kerwin AJ, Bynoe RP, Murray J, et al. Liberalized screening for blunt carotid and vertebral artery injuries is justified. J Trauma. 2001;51:308–314
- Mayberry JC, Brown CV, Mullins RJ, Velmahos, GC. Blunt carotid artery injury: The futility of aggressive screening and diagnosis. Arch Surg. 2004;139:609–613
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Offner PJ, et al. Optimizing Screening for Blunt Cerebrovascular injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:517–522
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Offner PJ, et al. Optimizing Screening for Blunt Cerebrovascular injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:517–522
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Biffl WL, et al. Cervical spine fracture patterns predictive of blunt vertebral artery injury. J Trauma. 2003;55:811–813
- 24 Cothren CC, Moore EE, Ray CE Jr, et al. Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries is cost effective. Am J Sgy. 2005;190:845-849
- DiPerna CA, Rowe VL, Terramani TT, et al. Clinical importance of the “Seat Belt Sign” in blunt trauma to the neck. Am Surg. 2002;5:441–445
- Rozycki GS, Tremblay L, Feliciano DV, et al. A prospective study for the detection of vascular injury in adult and pediatric patients with cervicothoracic seat belt signs. J Trauma. 2002;52:618–624
- Mutze S, Rademacher G, Matthes G, Hosten N, Stengel D. Blunt cerebrovascular injury in patients with blunt multiple trauma: Diagnostic accuracy of duplex doppler US and early CT angiography. Radiology. 2005;237:884–892
- Cogbill TH, Moore EE, Meissner M, et al. The spectrum of blunt injury to the carotid artery: A multicenter perspective. J Trauma. 1994;37:473–479
- Sturzenegger M, Mattle HP, Rivoir A, et al. Ultrasound findings in spontaneous extracranial vertebral artery dissection. Stroke. 1993;24:1910–1921
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Offner PJ, et al. Optimizing Screening for Blunt Cerebrovascular injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:517–522
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Ray, Jr CE, et al. Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries is cost effective. Am J Sgy. 2005;190:845–849
- cost data, unpublished, Memorial Health University Medical Center, Savannah, GA
- Willinsky RA, Taylor SM, terBrugge K, et al. Neurologic complications of cerebral angiography: Prospective analysis of 2,899 procedures and review of the literature. Radiology. 2003;227:522–528
- Berne JD, Norwood SH, McAuley CE, Villareal DH. Helical computed tomographic angiography: An excellent screening test for blunt cerebrovascular injury. J Trauma. 2004;57:11–19
- Bok AP, Peter JC. Carotid and vertebral artery occlusion after blunt cervical injury: The role of MR angiography in early diagnosis. J Trauma. 1996;4–:660–666
- Friedman D, Flanders A, Thomas C, Millar W. Vertebral artery injury after acute cervical spine trauma: Rate of occurrence as detected by MR angiography and assessment of clinical consequences. AJR. 1995;164:443–447
- Giacobetti FB, Vaccaro AR, Bos-Giacobetti MA, et al. Vertebral artery occlusion associated with cervical spine trauma: A prospective analysis. Spine. 1997;22:188–192
- Weller SJ, Rossitch E Jr., Malek AM. Detection of vertebral artery injury after cervical spine trauma using magnetic resonance angiography. J Trauma. 1999;46:660–666
- Miller PR, Fabian TC, Croce MA, et al. Prospective screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Analysis of diagnostic modalities and outcomes. Ann Surg. 2002;236:386–395
- Levy C, Laissy J, Raveau V, et al. Carotid and vertebral artery dissections: Three-dimensional time-of –flight MR angiography and MR imaging versus conventional angiography. Radiology. 1994;190:97–103
- Biffl WL, Ray CE, Moore EE, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis or blunt cerebrovascular injuries: A preliminary report. J Trauma. 2002;53;850–856
- Miller PR, Fabian TC, Croce MA, et al. Prospective screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Analysis of diagnostic modalities and outcomes. Ann Surg. 2002;236:386–395
- Bub LD, Hollingworth W, Jarvik JG, Hallam DK. Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury: Evaluating the accuracy of multidetector computed tomographic angiography. J Trauma. 2005;59:691–697
- Berne JD, Norwood SH, McAuley CE, Villareal DH. Helical Computed tomographic angiography: An excellent screening test for blunt cerebrovascular injury. J Trauma. 2004;57:11–19
- Berne JD, Reuland KS, Villarreal DH, McGovern TM, Rowe SA, Norwood SH. Sixteen-slice multidetector computed tomographic angiography improves the accuracy of screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury. J Trauma. 2006;60:1204–1210
- Biffl WL, Moore EE. Computed tomographic angiography as a screening modality for blunt cervical arterial injuries: a cautionary note. J Trauma. 1999;47:438–439. Letter.
- Biffl WL, Egglin T, Benedetto B, Gibbs F, Cioffi WG. Sixteen-slice computed tomographic angiography is a reliable noninvasive screening test for clinically significant blunt cerebrovascular injuries. J Trauma. 2006;60:745–752
- Schneidereit NP, Simons R, Nicolaou S, et al. Utility of screening for blunt vascular neck injuries with computed tomographic angiography. J Trauma. 2006;60:209–216
- Eastman AL, Chason DP, Perez CL, McAnulty AL, Minei JP. Computed tomographic angiography for the diagnosis of blunt cervical vascular injury: Is it ready for primetime? J Trauma. 2006;60:925–929
- Lew SM, Frumiento C, Wald SL. Pediatric Blunt carotid injury: A review of the National Pediatric Trauma Registry. Ped Neurosurg. 1999;30:239–244
- Duke BD, Partington MD. Blunt carotid injury in children. Ped Neurosurg. 1996;25:188–193
- Troop BR, Carr SC, Hurley JJ, Pennell RJ. Blunt Carotid Injuries. Contemp Surg. 1996;48:280–284
- Martin RF, Eldrup-Jorgensen J, Clark DE, Bredenberg CE. Blunt trauma to the carotid arteries. J Vasc Surg. 1991;14:789–795
- Perry MO, Snyder WH, Thal ER. Carotid injuries caused by blunt trauma. Ann Surg. 1980;192:74–77
- Ramadan F, Rutledge R, Oller D, et al. Carotid artery trauma: a review of contemporary trauma center experiences. J Vasc Surg. 1995;21:46–55
- Unger SW, Tucker WS Jr, Mrdeza MA, Wellons HA Jr, Chandler JG. Carotid arterial trauma. Surgery. 1980;87:477–87
- Karlin RM, Marks C. Extracranial carotid artery injury. Am J Surg. 1983;146225–227
- Richardson. Management of carotid artery trauma. Surgery. 1998;104:673–680
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Biffl WL, et al. Anticoagulation is the gold standard therapy for blunt carotid injuries to reduce stroke rate. Arch Surg. 2004;139:540–546
- Fabian RC, Patton JH, Croce MA, et al. Blunt carotid injury: Importance of early diagnosis and anticoagulant therapy. Ann Surg. 1996;223:513–525
- Miller PR, Fabian TC, Bee TK, et al. Blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Diagnosis and treatment. J Trauma. 2001;51:279–286
- Prall JA, Brega KE, Coldwell DM, Breeze RE. Incidence of unsuspected blunt carotid artery injury. Neurosurgery. 1998;42:495–49
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Ryu RK, et al. The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: Early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surg. 1998;228:462–470
- Wahl WL, Brandt MM, Thompson BG, Taheri PA, Greenfield LJ. Antiplatelet therapy: An alternative to heparin for blunt carotid injury. J Trauma. 2002;52:896–901
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Biffl WL, et al. Anticoagulation is the gold standard therapy for blunt carotid injuries to reduce stroke rate. Arch Surg. 2004;139:540–546
- Biffl WL, Ray CE, Moore EE, et al. Treatment-related outcomes from blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Importance of routine follow-up autobiography. Ann Surg. 2002;235:699–707
- Nanda A, Vannemreddy PS, Willis BK, Baskaya MK, Jawahar A. Management of carotid artery injuries: Louisiana State University Shreveport experience. Surg Neurol. 2003;59:184–190
- Biffl WL, Moore EE, Ryu RK, et al. The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: Early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surg. 1998;228:462–470
- Biffl WL, Ray CE, Moore EE, et al. Treatment-related outcomes from blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Importance of routine follow-up arteriography. Ann Surg. 2002;235:699–707
- Halbach VV, Higashida RT, Dowd CF, et al. Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissections and pseudoaneurysms. J Neurosurg. 1993;79:183–191
- Yee LF, Olcott EW, Knudson MM, Lim RC Jr. Extraluminal, transluminal and observational treatment for vertebral artery injuries. J Trauma. 1995;39:480–484
- Duke BJ, Ryu RK, Coldwell DM, Brega KE. Treatment of blunt injury to the carotid artery by using endovascular stents: an early experience. J Neurosurg. 1997;87:825–829
- Coldwell DM, Novak Z, Ryu RK, et al. Treatment of posttraumatic internal carotid arterial pseudoaneurysms with endovascular stents. J Trauma. 2000;48:470–472
- Cothren CC, Moore EE, Ray CE, et al. Carotid artery stents for blunt cerebrovascular injury: Risks exceed benefits. Arch Surg. 2005;140:480–486
- Biffl WL, Ray CE, Moore EE, et al. Treatment-related outcomes from blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Importance of routine follow-up arteriography. Ann Surg. 2002;235:699–707
Tables
Tables
First author | Year | Reference title | Class | Conclusions |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ahmad HA | 1999 | Cervicocerebral artery dissections. J Accid Emerg Med. 1999;16:422-424 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 18 mixed traumatic and non-traumatic cases. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Batnitzky S | 1983 | Cervical internal carotid artery injuries due to blunt trauma. Am J NeuroRadiol. 1983;4:292-295 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 21 cases of blunt carotid injury. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Berne JD | 2001 | The high morbidity of blunt cerebrovascular injury in an unscreened population: more evidence of the need for mandatory screening protocols. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:314-321 | III |
Design: Registry review, identified 30 patients over 4 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Berne JD | 2004 | Helical computed tomographic angiography: an excellent screening test for blunt cerebrovascular injury. J Trauma. 2004;57:11-19 | II |
Design: Prospective screening to identify BCVI with helical CTA using a four-slice scanner initially and then 16 slice. All positive CTAs were followed by angiography. All the negative CTA patients were followed by physical exam during admission and none manifested symptoms of BCVI. They did not perform angiography in patients with negative CTA. Screening was based on following injuries
Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Berne JD | 2006 | Sixteen-slice multi-detector computed tomographic angiography improves the accuracy of screening for BCVI | II |
Design: Prospective screening protocol initiated based on injury criteria which led to CTA using a 16-slice scanner. Positive, equivocal, and suspicious studies were followed up with FVCA. Patients with negative studies were followed clinically. This is a subset of an earlier group that was then compared to CTA with a 4-slice scanner. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 1998 | The unrecognized epidemic of blunt carotid arterial injuries: early diagnosis improves neurologic outcome. Ann Surg. 1998;228:462-470 | III |
Design: Retrospective registry review of 15,331 blunt trauma patients. Compared unscreened population (prior to 1996) to screened population. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 1999 | Blunt carotid arterial injuries: implications of a new grading scale. J Trauma. 1999;47:845-853 | II |
Design: Initially retrospective review followed by prospective protocol. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 1999 | Optimizing screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:517-522 | II |
Design: Prospective observational study in which 249 patients meeting certain screening criteria underwent DFVCA. Screening Criteria:
Findings:
|
Biffl WL | 2000 | The devastating potential of blunt vertebral arterial injuries. Ann Surg. 2000;231:672-681 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 2002 | Noninvasive diagnosis of blunt cerebrovascular injuries: a preliminary report. J Trauma. 2002;35:850-856 | II |
Design: 46 asymptomatic patients selected by application of a previously reported screening algorithm underwent both arteriogram and either CTA (single slice scanner) or MRA. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 2002 | Treatment-related outcomes from blunt cerebrovascular injuries. Importance of routine follow-up arteriography. Ann Surg. 2002;235:699-707 | II |
Design: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Biffl WL | 2006 | Sixteen-Slice CT-angiography is a reliable noninvasive screening test for clinically significant blunt cerebrovascular injuries | II |
Design: Prospective evaluation of 16-slice CTA in a screening role. A positive CTA was confirmed with DFVCA. Patients with a negative CTA were followed clinically. Findings:
Recommendations: 16-slice CTA is a reliable noninvasive screening test for clinically significant BCVI. |
Bub LD | 2005 | Screening for BCVI: Evaluating the accuracy of Multidetector CTA | III |
Design: Retrospective review Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Carrillo EH | 1999 | Blunt carotid artery injuries: difficulties with the diagnosis prior to neurologic event. J Truama. 1999;46:1120-1125 | III |
Design: Review of 21,428 patient registry which identified 30 injured patients. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Cogbill TH | 1994 | The spectrum of blunt injury to the carotid artery: a multi-center perspective. J Trauma. 1994;37:473-439 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 49 patients (60 injuries) from 11 institutions. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Coldwell DM | 2000 | Treatment of posttraumatic internal carotid arterial pseudoaneurysms with endovascular stents. J Trauma. 2000;48:470-472 | III |
Design: Case series of 14 patients with blunt carotid pseudoaneurysms treated with metallic endoprostheses and anticoagulation. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Colella JJ | 1996 | Blunt carotid injury: reassessing the role of anticoagulation. Am Surg. 1996;62:212-217 | III |
Design: Retrospective database review which identified 20 patients with BCAI. Findings:
Recommendation:
|
Cothren CC | 2004 | Anticoagulation is the gold standard therapy for blunt carotid injuries to reduce stroke rate. Arch Surg. 2004:139:540-546 | II |
Design: Prospectively collected, observational study, non-randomized. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Cothren CC | 2005 | Carotid artery stents for BCVI: Risks exceed benefits. | II |
Design: Prospectively collected database of patients with CAI treated with stenting. Post stenting patients were placed on therapeutic warfarin. Stent patients received follow-up angiography. Patients treated with antithrombotic agents alone were followed clinically. Findings:
|
Cothren CC | 2005 | Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury is cost effective | III |
Design: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Davis JW | 1990 | Blunt carotid artery dissection: incidence, associated injuries, screening and treatment. J Trauma. 1990;30:1514-1517 | III |
Design: Retrospective review, multi-institutional. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
DiPerna CA | 2002 | Clinical importance of the ìseat belt signî in blunt trauma to the neck. Am Surg. 2002;5:441-445 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 131 patients who presented with cervical seat belt sign and subsequently underwent duplex ultrasonography. Findings:
Recommendations:
Note: based on the small number of asymptomatic patients (50) and the estimated 1.5% incidence of BCVI in a screened asymptomatic population it is likely that no injuries were present in the asymptomatic group. |
Duke BJ | 1996 | Blunt carotid injury in children. Ped Neurosurg. 1996;25:188-193 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of affiliated hospital databases. Five patients with BCI were identified. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Duke BJ | 1997 | Treatment of blunt injury to the carotid artery by using endovascular stents: an early experience. J Neurosurg. 1997;87:825-829 | III |
Design: Case series of 6 patients who were treated with stenting for worsening pseudoaneurysm on repeat angiography. Stents were anticoagulated with heparin followed by coumadin for 8 weeks followed by aspirin for 1 additional month. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Eachempati SR | 1998 | Blunt vascular injuries of the head and neck: is heparinization necessary? J Trauma. 1998;45:997-1004 | III |
Design: Retrospective database review. 23 patients with BCVI identified over 9 year period. Extremely heterogeneous treatments and outcomes. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Eastman, AL | 2005 | Computed tomographic angiography for the diagnosis of blunt cervical vascular injury: Is it ready for primetime? | II |
Design: Prospective, blinded observational study. Patients were screened for BCVI with 16-slice CTA followed by DFVCA. 162 patients were screened with CTA. 16 did not receive arteriogram secondary to refusal of consent (12) or early discharge (4). 6 patients died from non-neurologic causes prior to angiogram and were excluded. Note: this is the only study in which both positive and negative CTA were followed with angiography. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Fabian TC | 1996 | Blunt Carotid Injury. Importance of early diagnosis and anticoagulant therapy. Ann Surg. 1996;223:513-525 | III |
Design: A retrospective review of a trauma registry which identified 67 patients with 87 BCAIs over 11 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Fakhry SM | 1988 | Cervical vessel injury after blunt trauma. J Vasc Surg. 1988;8:501-508 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 10 patients with 18 blunt cervical vessel injuries over 12 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
French BN | 1988 | Cranial computed tomography in the diagnosis of symptomatic indirect trauma to the carotid artery. Aust N Z J Surg. 1988;58:651 | III |
Design: Retrospective case series. Documents the natural history of untreated or undiagnosed CAI. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Friedman D | 1995 | Vertebral artery injury after acute cervical spine trauma: Rate of occurrence as detected by MR angiography and assessment of clinical consequences. Am J Roentgenol. 1995;164:443-447 | II |
Design: Prospective, non-randomized protocol in which all patients with C-spine injury underwent MRI and MRA of cervical spine. No confirmatory angiography. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Giacobetti RF | 1997 | Vertebral artery occlusion associated with cervical spine trauma: A prospective analysis. Spine. 1997;22:188-192 | II |
Design: Prospective protocol in which all patients presenting with cervical spine injury underwent MRI/MRA. No confirmatory angiography was performed. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Halbach VV | 1993 | Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissections and pseudoaneurysms. J Neurosurg. 1993;79:183-191 | III |
Design: Review of endovascular treatment of 16 patients with symptomatic VA dissections and pseudoaneurysms of a mixture of traumatic and spontaneous etiologies. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Hellner D | 1993 | Blunt trauma lesions of the extracranial internal carotid artery in patients with head injury. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1993;21:234-238 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 18 patients over 22 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Hughes KM | 2000 | Traumatic carotid artery dissection: a significant incidental finding. Am Surg. 2000;11:1023-1027 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of patients who had incidental findings of BCAI when being screened for c-spine injury with MRI. Patients were subsequently treated medically. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Kerwin AJ | 2001 | Liberalized screening for blunt carotid and vertebral artery injuries is justified. J Trauma. 2001;51:308-314 | II |
Design:
Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Kraus RR | 1999 | Diagnosis, treatment and outcome of blunt carotid arterial injuries. Am J Surg. 1999;178:190-193 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 16 patients with blunt carotid artery injuries. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Lévy C | 1994 | Carotid and vertebral artery dissections: Three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography and MR imaging versus conventional angiography. Radiology. 1994;190:97-103 | II |
Design: Prospective protocol in which MRI versus MRA was evaluated in angiographically confirmed BCVI in 18 patients. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Lew SM | 1999 | Pediatric blunt carotid injury: a review of the national pediatric trauma registry. Ped Neurosurg. 1999;30:239-244 | III |
Design: Review of the National Pediatric Trauma Registry and thorough review of the adult literature. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Louw JA | 1990 | Occlusion of the vertebral artery in cervical spine dislocations. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:679-681 | II |
Design: All patients with cervical spine facet dislocations were evaluated for BVAI with angiography. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Martin RF | 1991 | Blunt trauma to the carotid arteries. J Vasc Surg. 1991;14:789-795 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 8 patients over 10 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Mayberry JC | 2004 | Blunt carotid artery injury. The futility of aggressive screening and diagnosis. Arch Surg. 2004;139:609-613 | III |
Design: Retrospective multi-institutional review. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
McKevitt EC | 2002 | Blunt vascular neck injuries: diagnosis and outcomes of extracranial vessel injury. J Trauma. 2002;53:472-476 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 22 patients identified over 8 years. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
McKevitt EC | 2002 | Identifying patients at risk for intracranial and extracranial blunt carotid injuries. Am J Surg. 2002;183:566-570 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of British Columbia trauma registry to identify injury patterns that increase risk of BCAI, looking at both extracranial arterial injury (ECAI) and intracranial arterial injuries (ICAI). Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Miller PR | 2001 | Blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Diagnosis and treatment. J Trauma. 2001;51:279-286 | III |
Design: Retrospective review. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Miller PR | 2002 | Prospective screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries. Analysis of diagnostic modalities and outcomes. Ann Surg. 2002;236:386-395 | II |
Design: Prospective evaluation of a screening protocol for BCVI. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Mutze, S | 2005 | Blunt CVI in patients with blunt multiple trauma: Diagnostic accuracy of duplex doppler US and early CTA | II |
Design: Prospective observational study. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Nanda A | 2003 | Management of carotid artery injuries: LSU Shreveport experience. Surg Neurol. 2003;59:184-90 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 23 patients with carotid injury of mixed blunt and penetrating etiology. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Parent AD | 1992 | Lateral cervical spine dislocation and vertebral artery injury. Neurosurgery. 1992;31:501-509 | III |
Design: Case series of quadriplegic patients with cervical spine injuries, all at C5-C6 with subluxation with some element of lateral vertebral displacement. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Parikh AA | 1997 | Blunt carotid artery injuries. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:80-86 | III |
Design: A retrospective chart review looking at patients with BCI. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Perry MO | 1980 | Carotid artery injuries caused by blunt trauma. Ann Surg, 1980;192:74-77 | III |
Design: Retrospective case series of 17 patients described with blunt carotid injury. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Prall JA | 1998 | Incidence of unsuspected blunt carotid artery injury. Neurosurgery. 1998;42:495-499 | II |
Design: Prospective observational study in which patients that were to have thoracic aortography also underwent angiography of the neck for identification of occult BCAI. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Punjabi AP | 1997 | Diagnosis and management of blunt carotid artery injury in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;56:1388-1396 | III |
Design: Retrospective review of 10 patients with BCAI ñ all patients had symptoms at presentation. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Rogers FB | 1999 | Computed tomographic angiography as a screening modality for blunt cervical arterial injuries: preliminary results. J Trauma. 1999;43:280-385 | II |
Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data before and after a screening protocol using CTA was instituted. The type of CT scanner was not identified. CTA not used consistently and patients with negative CTA received only clinical follow-up (no angiography). Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Rozycki GS | 2002 | A prospective study for the detection of vascular injury in adult and pediatric patients with cervicothoracic seat belt signs. J Trauma. 2002;52:618-624 | II |
Design: Prospective, non-randomized study of 131 patients with seat-belt signs after blunt trauma. 4 patients found with BCVI. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Schneidereit NP | 2006 | Utility of screening for blunt vascular neck injuries with computed tomographic angiography. | II |
Design: Prospective, non-randomized study of a CTA screening protocol utilizing an 8-slice CT scanner. Negative studies did not undergo confirmatory conventional angiography. 10 of 33 abnormal scans also did not undergo confirmatory conventional angiography; four of these were treated based on the CTA alone, 3 patients were thought to have a false positive CTA and were followed with observation, and 3 had minimal injury to a vertebral artery and were followed with observation. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Wahl WL | 2002 | Antiplatelet therapy: an alternative to heparin for blunt carotid injury. J Trauma. 2002;52:896-901 | III |
Design: Retrospective registry review of 22 patients diagnosed with BCAI. 7 of which were treated with heparin and 7 treated with antiplatelet agents Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Weller SJ | 1999 | Detection of vertebral artery injury after cervical spine trauma using magnetic resonance angiography. J Trauma. 1999;46:660-666 | II |
Design: Prospective non-randomized review of a screening protocol utilizing MRI/MRA for the detection of BVAI in patients with evidence of cervical fracture or dislocation. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Willis BK | 1994 | The incidence of vertebral artery injury after midcervical spine fracture or subluxation. Neurosurgery. 1994;34:435-442 | II |
Design: Prospective non-randomized observational study in which all patients presenting with an unstable cervical spine injury or fracture through the foramen transversarium underwent angiography of the vertebral arteries. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
Woodring JH | 1993 | Transverse process fractures of the cervical vertebrae: are they insignificant? J Trauma. 1993;34:797-802 | III |
Design: Retrospective chart review of 216 patients with cervical spine injury of which 8 were found to have transverse process fractures into the vertebral foramen. Findings:
Recommendations:
|
York G | 2005 | Association of internal carotid artery injury with carotid canal fractures in patients with head injury | III |
Design: Retrospective review of patients found to have carotid canal (CC) fracture who subsequently underwent cerebral angiography within 7 days. Findings:
Recommendations:
|