Utility of ABI and API Versus CTA to Identify Surgically Significant Arterial Injury After Lower Extremity Trauma in a LMIC.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Rubinette Robbertze, Megan Lubout, Daniel Nicholas Prince, Isabella Margaretha Joubert, Maeyane S Moeng
{"title":"Utility of ABI and API Versus CTA to Identify Surgically Significant Arterial Injury After Lower Extremity Trauma in a LMIC.","authors":"Rubinette Robbertze, Megan Lubout, Daniel Nicholas Prince, Isabella Margaretha Joubert, Maeyane S Moeng","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South Africa faces a high burden of trauma-related vascular injury. Prompt diagnosis and management are crucial to limit morbidity and mortality. Literature recommends a thorough vascular examination of at-risk patients. Ankle brachial index (ABI) and arterial pressure index (API) are considered reliable screening tools for lower extremity vascular injury (LEVI) in the correct clinical scenario. Patients with an abnormal ABI/API warrant diagnostic imaging with computed tomography angiography (CTA). However, recent international literature demonstrates a trend toward potential CTA overuse in the work up for LEVI, when the internationally recommended vascular injury work-up guidelines are not followed correctly.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the reliability of ABI/API in trauma patients with suspected LEVI as a screening tool to safely avoid unnecessary CTA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study of all lower extremity trauma patients with soft signs of LEVI who presented to Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital from February 1, 2018 to January 31, 2020 was undertaken. Sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV were calculated for ABI/API versus CTA and ABI/API/CTA versus surgically significant arterial injury. A p-value < 0.05 indicated statistical significance (confidence level = 95%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four hundred and thirty-three CTAs were performed for suspected traumatic LEVI. Two hundred and eighty-two were excluded due to missing data (precluding retrospective calculation of ABI/API) and 151 patients were included. To detect surgically significant injury, CTA had a 100% sensitivity, 97.2% specificity, 100% NPV, and 69.2% PPV; ABI and API had a 100% sensitivity, 83.8%-85.9% specificity, 100% NPV, and 28.1%-35.9% PPV, respectively. Neither ABI nor API missed surgically significant arterial injuries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This affirms the reliability of ABI/API as a screening tool to identify patients at risk of LEVI from penetrating trauma. Findings supported international data demonstrating CTA overuse in this subset of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":23926,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12623","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: South Africa faces a high burden of trauma-related vascular injury. Prompt diagnosis and management are crucial to limit morbidity and mortality. Literature recommends a thorough vascular examination of at-risk patients. Ankle brachial index (ABI) and arterial pressure index (API) are considered reliable screening tools for lower extremity vascular injury (LEVI) in the correct clinical scenario. Patients with an abnormal ABI/API warrant diagnostic imaging with computed tomography angiography (CTA). However, recent international literature demonstrates a trend toward potential CTA overuse in the work up for LEVI, when the internationally recommended vascular injury work-up guidelines are not followed correctly.

Aim: To assess the reliability of ABI/API in trauma patients with suspected LEVI as a screening tool to safely avoid unnecessary CTA.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all lower extremity trauma patients with soft signs of LEVI who presented to Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital from February 1, 2018 to January 31, 2020 was undertaken. Sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV were calculated for ABI/API versus CTA and ABI/API/CTA versus surgically significant arterial injury. A p-value < 0.05 indicated statistical significance (confidence level = 95%).

Results: Four hundred and thirty-three CTAs were performed for suspected traumatic LEVI. Two hundred and eighty-two were excluded due to missing data (precluding retrospective calculation of ABI/API) and 151 patients were included. To detect surgically significant injury, CTA had a 100% sensitivity, 97.2% specificity, 100% NPV, and 69.2% PPV; ABI and API had a 100% sensitivity, 83.8%-85.9% specificity, 100% NPV, and 28.1%-35.9% PPV, respectively. Neither ABI nor API missed surgically significant arterial injuries.

Conclusion: This affirms the reliability of ABI/API as a screening tool to identify patients at risk of LEVI from penetrating trauma. Findings supported international data demonstrating CTA overuse in this subset of patients.

应用ABI和API与CTA鉴别LMIC患者下肢外伤后手术显著动脉损伤。
背景:南非面临着创伤相关血管损伤的高负担。及时诊断和管理对限制发病率和死亡率至关重要。文献建议对高危患者进行全面的血管检查。踝肱指数(Ankle brachial index, ABI)和动脉压指数(arterial pressure index, API)在正确的临床情况下被认为是下肢血管损伤(lower extremity vascular injury, LEVI)的可靠筛查工具。ABI/API异常的患者需要进行计算机断层血管造影(CTA)诊断。然而,最近的国际文献表明,当国际推荐的血管损伤检查指南没有正确遵循时,在LEVI的工作中存在潜在的CTA过度使用的趋势。目的:评估ABI/API在疑似LEVI的创伤患者中作为筛查工具的可靠性,以安全避免不必要的CTA。方法:回顾性队列研究2018年2月1日至2020年1月31日在Charlotte Maxeke约翰内斯堡学术医院就诊的所有伴有LEVI软征的下肢创伤患者。计算ABI/API与CTA、ABI/API/CTA与手术显著动脉损伤的敏感性、特异性、NPV和PPV。A p值结果:对疑似外伤性LEVI进行了433例cta。282例因数据缺失而被排除(排除了ABI/API的回顾性计算),151例患者被纳入。对于手术意义重大的损伤,CTA的敏感性为100%,特异性为97.2%,NPV为100%,PPV为69.2%;ABI和API的敏感性为100%,特异性为83.8% ~ 85.9%,NPV为100%,PPV为28.1% ~ 35.9%。ABI和API均未遗漏手术中显著的动脉损伤。结论:这证实了ABI/API作为一种筛选工具识别穿透性创伤患者LEVI风险的可靠性。研究结果支持国际数据显示CTA在这部分患者中过度使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Surgery
World Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
460
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgery is the official publication of the International Society of Surgery/Societe Internationale de Chirurgie (iss-sic.com). Under the editorship of Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, World Journal of Surgery provides an in-depth, international forum for the most authoritative information on major clinical problems in the fields of clinical and experimental surgery, surgical education, and socioeconomic aspects of surgical care. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished surgeons from across the world who make up the Editorial Board.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信