[Comparison of planimetric CT‑based volumetry with simplified models for determining the size of intrapelvic hematomas due to pelvic fractures in emergency room diagnostics].

Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-12 DOI:10.1007/s00113-023-01324-x
S Möller, A Seif Amir Hosseini, A Emami, A Langheinrich, S Sehmisch, R Hoffmann, U Schweigkofler
{"title":"[Comparison of planimetric CT‑based volumetry with simplified models for determining the size of intrapelvic hematomas due to pelvic fractures in emergency room diagnostics].","authors":"S Möller, A Seif Amir Hosseini, A Emami, A Langheinrich, S Sehmisch, R Hoffmann, U Schweigkofler","doi":"10.1007/s00113-023-01324-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bleeding in the pelvis can lead to a circulatory problem. The widely used whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) scan in the context of treatment in the trauma resuscitation unit (TRU) can give an idea of the source of bleeding (arterial vs. venous/osseous); however, the volume determination of an intrapelvic hematoma by volumetric planimetry cannot be used for a quick estimation of the blood loss. Simplified measurement techniques using geometric models should be used to estimate the extent of bleeding complications.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether simplified geometric models can be used to quickly and reliably determine intrapelvic hematoma volume in fractures type Tile B/C during emergency room diagnostics or whether the time-consuming planimetric method must always be used.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Retrospectively, 42 intrapelvic hemorrhages after pelvic fractures Tile B + C (n = 8:B, 34:C) at two trauma centers in Germany were selected (66% men, 33% women; mean age 42 ± 20 years) and the CT scans obtained during the initial trauma scan were analyzed in more detail. The CT datasets of the included patients with 1-5 mm slice thickness were available for analysis. By area labelling (ROIs) of the hemorrhage areas in the individual slice images, the volume was calculated by CT volumetrically. Comparatively, volumes were calculated using simplified geometric figures (cuboid, ellipsoid, Kothari). A correction factor was determined by calculating the deviation of the volumes of the geometric models from the planimetrically determined hematoma size.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The median planimetric bleeding volume in the total collective was 1710 ml (10-7152 ml). Relevant pelvic bleeding with a total volume > 100 ml existed in 25 patients. In 42.86% the volume was overestimated in the cuboid model and in 13 cases (30.95%) there was a significant underestimation to the planimetrically measured volume. Thus, we excluded this volume model. In the models ellipsoid and measuring method according to Kothari, an approximation to the planimetrically determined volume could be achieved with a correction factor calculated via a multiple linear regression analysis. The time-saving and approximate quantification of the hematoma volume using a modified ellipsoidal calculation according to Kothari makes it possible to assess the extent of bleeding in the pelvis after trauma if there are signs of a C-problem. This measurement method, as a simple reproducible metric, could be embedded in trauma resuscitation units (TRU) in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":75280,"journal":{"name":"Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-023-01324-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bleeding in the pelvis can lead to a circulatory problem. The widely used whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) scan in the context of treatment in the trauma resuscitation unit (TRU) can give an idea of the source of bleeding (arterial vs. venous/osseous); however, the volume determination of an intrapelvic hematoma by volumetric planimetry cannot be used for a quick estimation of the blood loss. Simplified measurement techniques using geometric models should be used to estimate the extent of bleeding complications.

Objective: To determine whether simplified geometric models can be used to quickly and reliably determine intrapelvic hematoma volume in fractures type Tile B/C during emergency room diagnostics or whether the time-consuming planimetric method must always be used.

Material and methods: Retrospectively, 42 intrapelvic hemorrhages after pelvic fractures Tile B + C (n = 8:B, 34:C) at two trauma centers in Germany were selected (66% men, 33% women; mean age 42 ± 20 years) and the CT scans obtained during the initial trauma scan were analyzed in more detail. The CT datasets of the included patients with 1-5 mm slice thickness were available for analysis. By area labelling (ROIs) of the hemorrhage areas in the individual slice images, the volume was calculated by CT volumetrically. Comparatively, volumes were calculated using simplified geometric figures (cuboid, ellipsoid, Kothari). A correction factor was determined by calculating the deviation of the volumes of the geometric models from the planimetrically determined hematoma size.

Results and discussion: The median planimetric bleeding volume in the total collective was 1710 ml (10-7152 ml). Relevant pelvic bleeding with a total volume > 100 ml existed in 25 patients. In 42.86% the volume was overestimated in the cuboid model and in 13 cases (30.95%) there was a significant underestimation to the planimetrically measured volume. Thus, we excluded this volume model. In the models ellipsoid and measuring method according to Kothari, an approximation to the planimetrically determined volume could be achieved with a correction factor calculated via a multiple linear regression analysis. The time-saving and approximate quantification of the hematoma volume using a modified ellipsoidal calculation according to Kothari makes it possible to assess the extent of bleeding in the pelvis after trauma if there are signs of a C-problem. This measurement method, as a simple reproducible metric, could be embedded in trauma resuscitation units (TRU) in the future.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[在急诊室诊断中确定骨盆骨折引起的骨盆内血肿大小时,基于 CT 的平面体积测量法与简化模型的比较]。
背景介绍骨盆出血可导致循环系统问题。在创伤复苏室(TRU)进行治疗时,广泛使用的全身计算机断层扫描(WBCT)可以了解出血的来源(动脉还是静脉/骨膜);但是,通过体积平面测量法确定骨盆内血肿的体积并不能用于快速估算失血量。应使用几何模型的简化测量技术来估计出血并发症的程度:目的:确定在急诊室诊断过程中,是否可以使用简化的几何模型快速、可靠地确定 Tile B/C 型骨折患者骨盆内血肿的体积,还是必须始终使用耗时的平面测量法:回顾性选取了德国两家创伤中心的 42 名骨盆 B+C 型骨折后骨盆内出血的患者(n = 8:B, 34:C)(66% 为男性,33% 为女性;平均年龄为 42 ± 20 岁),并对初次创伤扫描时获得的 CT 扫描结果进行了详细分析。所选患者的 CT 数据集切片厚度为 1-5 毫米,可供分析之用。通过对单张切片图像中的出血区域进行区域标记(ROI),用 CT 容积计算出出血量。相比之下,体积是用简化的几何图形(长方体、椭圆体、Kothari)计算的。通过计算几何模型体积与通过平面测量确定的血肿大小的偏差来确定校正系数:整个集体的平面测量出血量中位数为 1710 毫升(10-7152 毫升)。有 25 名患者的盆腔出血量大于 100 毫升。42.86%的患者的出血量在立方体模型中被高估,13 例(30.95%)患者的出血量明显低于平面测量值。因此,我们排除了这种体积模型。在椭圆体模型和科塔里测量方法中,可以通过多元线性回归分析计算出一个校正因子来近似平面测量的体积。使用根据 Kothari 改良的椭圆形计算方法对血肿体积进行近似量化既节省时间,又能在有 C 型问题迹象的情况下评估创伤后骨盆出血的程度。这种测量方法是一种简单、可重复的度量方法,将来可嵌入创伤复苏单元(TRU)。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Utilization of registers to create an evidence-based approach in catastrophes and civil defence]. [Fatal course of a fulminant gas gangrene of the right hemithorax]. [Intramedullary nailing of coated and uncoated nails in infected tibial pseudarthrosis : Results of a retrospective examination of 56 patients]. [Possibilities of the utilization of trauma networks of the German Society for Trauma Surgery using digital solutions]. [Total calcanectomy in osteomyelitis and soft tissue defect with complex secondary reconstruction of the hindfoot : Case report and literature comparison].
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1