4.4 Article

Necessity of monitoring after negative head CT in acute head injury

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.04.012

关键词

Head injury; Traumatic brain injury; Computed tomography; Hospital discharge; Mortality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of delayed complications in acute head injury (HI) patients with an initial normal head computed tomography (CT). Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 3023 consecutive patients who underwent head CT due to an acute HI at the Emergency Department (ED) of Tampere University Hospital (August 2010-July 2012). Regardless of clinical injury severity, the patients with a normal head CT were selected (n = 2444, 80.9%). The medical records of these patients were reviewed to identify the individuals with a serious clinically significant complication related to the primary HI. The time window considered was the following 72 h after the primary head CT. A repeated head CT in the hospital ward, death, or return to the ED were indicative of a possible complication. Results: The majority (n = 1811, 74.1%) of the patients with a negative head CT were discharged home and 1.1% (n = 27) of these patients returned to ED within 72 h post-CT. A repeated head CT was performed on 12 (44.4%) of the returned patients and none of the scans revealed an acute lesion. Of the 632 (25.9%) CT-negative patients admitted to the hospital ward from the ED, a head CT was repeated in 46 (7.3%) patients within 72 h as part of routine practice. In the repeated CT sample, only one (0.2%) patient had a traumatic intracranial lesion. This lesion did not need neurosurgical intervention. The overall complication rate was 0.04%. Conclusion: In the present study, which includes head injuries of all severity, the probability of delayed life-threatening complications was negligible when the primary CT scan revealed no acute traumatic lesions. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据