Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Abdominal gunshot wounds: multi-detector-row CT findings compared with laparotomy—a prospective study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Emergency Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to access the accuracy of multi-detector-row computed tomography (MDCT) in diagnosing injuries in hemodynamically stable abdominal gunshot wound victims (AGWV). Triple-contrast MDCT was performed in hemodynamically stable AGWV during a 20-month prospective diagnostic accuracy study. Thirty-one patients (30 males, 1 female; mean age, 24.3 years) were evaluated by two radiologists for evidence of injury to solid and hollow organs, vascular structures, urinary bladder, diaphragm, fractures, and general findings (free fluid, pneumoperitoneum, and mesentery lesions). All of the patients underwent laparotomy, and prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. No statistically significant differences between radiologists were found. All of the solid and hollow organ lesions, vascular lesions, and general findings were detected. One of the four urinary bladder lesions was missed by MDCT, leading in this case to a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100%, negative predictive value of 96.4%, and accuracy of 96.8% (p = 0.001). One of the eight diaphragm lesions was missed by MDCT, and its sensitivity was 87.5%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, negative predictive value was 95.8%, and accuracy was 96.8% (p < 0.001). Fractures were diagnosed in 74.4% of the patients (24 of 31). Fourteen (43.2%) patients demonstrated non-therapeutic laparotomy, in which minor lesions could have been managed conservatively. We concluded that MDCT is an accurate imaging method in evaluating selected AGWV, providing trusted information for emergency room physicians.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pryor JP, Reilly PM, Dabrowski GP, Grossman MD, Schwab CW (2004) Nonoperative management of abdominal gunshot wounds. Ann Emerg Med 43(3):344–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Moore EE, Moore JB, Van Duzer-Moore S, Thompson JS (1980) Mandatory laparotomy for gunshot wounds penetrating the abdomen. Am J Surg 140(6):847–851

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Maynard Ade L, Oropeza G (1968) Mandatory operation for penetrating wounds of the abdomen. Am J Surg 115(3):307–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shaftan GW (1960) Indications for operation in abdominal trauma. Am J Surg 99:657–664

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bull JC Jr, Mathewson C Jr (1968) Exploratory laparotomy in patients with penetrating wounds of the abdomen. Am J Surg 116(2):223–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nance FC, Wennar MH, Johnson LW, Ingram JC Jr, Cohn I Jr (1974) Surgical judgment in the management of penetrating wounds of the abdomen: experience with 2212 patients. Ann Surg 179(5):639–646

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lowe RJ, Saletta JD, Read DR, Radhakrishnan J, Moss GS (1977) Should laparotomy be mandatory or selective in gunshot wounds of the abdomen? J Trauma 17(12):903–907

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Renz BM, Feliciano DV (1995) Unnecessary laparotomies for trauma: a prospective study of morbidity. J Trauma 38(3):350–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Henderson VJ, Organ CH Jr, Smith RS (1993) Negative trauma celiotomy. Am Surg 59(6):365–370

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Renz BM, Feliciano DV (1996) The length of hospital stay after an unnecessary laparotomy for trauma: a prospective study. J Trauma 40(2):187–190

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Easter DW, Shackford SR, Mattrey RF (1991) A prospective randomized comparison of computed tomography with conventional diagnostic methods in the evaluation of penetrating injuries to the back and flank. Arch Surg 126(9):1115–1119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Velmahos GC, Demetriades D, Toutouzas KG et al (2001) Selective nonoperative management in 1,865 patients with abdominal gunshot wounds: should routine laparotomy still be the standard of care? Ann Surg 234(3):395–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Conrad MF, Patton JH Jr, Parikshak M, Kralovich KA (2003) Selective management of penetrating truncal injuries: is emergency department discharge a reasonable goal? Am Surg 69(3):266–272

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Demetriades D, Charalambides D, Lakhoo M et al (1991) Gunshot wounds of the abdomen: role of selective conservative management. Br J Surg 78(2):220–222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Demetriades D, Velmahos G, Cornwell E et al (1997) Selective nonoperative management of gunshot wounds of the anterior abdomen. Arch Surg 132(2):178–183

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Nagy KK, Krosner SM, Joseph KT et al (1997) A method of determining peritoneal penetration in gunshot wounds to the abdomen. J Trauma 43(2):242–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kelemen JJ 3rd, Martin RR, Obney JA et al (1997) Evaluation of diagnostic peritoneal lavage in stable patients with gunshot wounds to the abdomen. Arch Surg 132(8):909–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Udobi KF, Rodriguez A, Chiu WC, Scalea TM (2001) Role of ultrasonography in penetrating abdominal trauma: a prospective clinical study. J Trauma 50(3):475–479

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ditmars ML, Bongard F (1996) Laparoscopy for triage of penetrating trauma: the decision to explore. J Laparoendosc Surg 6(5):285–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Prokop M (2003) General principles of MDCT. Eur J Radiol 45(Suppl 1):S4–S10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rubin GD (2000) Data explosion: the challenge of multidetector-row CT. Eur J Radiol 36(2):74–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shanmuganathan K (2004) Multi-detector row CT imaging of blunt abdominal trauma. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 25(2):180–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Renz BM, Feliciano DV (1994) Gunshot wounds to the right thoracoabdomen: a prospective study of nonoperative management. J Trauma 37(5):737–744

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Grossman MD, May AK, Schwab CW et al (1998) Determining anatomic injury with computed tomography in selected torso gunshot wounds. J Trauma 45(3):446–456

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Shanmuganathan K, Mirvis SE, Chiu WC, Killeen KL, Hogan GJ, Scalea TM (2004) Penetrating torso trauma: triple-contrast helical CT in peritoneal violation and organ injury-a prospective study in 200 patients. Radiology 231(3):775–784

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Múnera F, Morales C, Soto JA et al (2004) Gunshot wounds of abdomen: evaluation of stable patients with triple-contrast helical CT. Radiology 231(2):399–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Inaba K, Demetriades D (2007) The nonoperative management of penetrating abdominal trauma. Adv Surg 41:51–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ernesto Lima Araujo Melo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Melo, E.L.A., de Menezes, M.R. & Cerri, G.G. Abdominal gunshot wounds: multi-detector-row CT findings compared with laparotomy—a prospective study. Emerg Radiol 19, 35–41 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-1004-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-1004-1

Keywords

Navigation