In patients without solid organ injury (SOI), the presence of free fluid along with abdominal guarding and three or more "minor CT findings" is a significant predictor of early surgical repair. The association of bowel wall discontinuity with extraluminal air warrants exploratory laparotomy.

Objective: The frequency of enostosis incidentally found on CT and CT attenuation value to distinguish them from untreated osteoblastic metastases (UOM). Methods: Enostosis group: 46 polytrauma patients underwent thoracoabdominal CT. Inclusion criteria: age range 14–35 years. Exclusion criteria: cancer, previous fractures. UOM group: 20 patients with radiological diagnosis of UOM. Analyzed data: number, size, location and density of enostoses and metastases. The density was measured with the broadest possible region of interest at the center of the lesion by two radiologists independently. Receiver operatingcharacteristic analysis to determine the sensitivity and specificity, area under the curve 95% confidence intervals and cutoff values of CT density to differentiate metastases from enostoses. Results: Patients were 28 ± 7 years old (72% males). 41 (89%) patients had 124 enostoses (2–15 mm) with an average density of 1007 ± 122 Hounsfiled unit (HU, observer1) and 1052 ± 107 (observer2). The most common sites of occurrence were the proximal femur (34%), the pelvis (22%), the acetabulum (20%), the proximal humerus (11%), the vertebrae (11%) and the rib (2%). 13 patients had 1 bone island, 8 patients had 2, 9 cases had 3 and 11 cases had more than 3 enostoses. Overall, 114 UOM were evaluated, their average density was 728 ± 163 HU (observer1) and 712 ± 178 HU (observer2). The area under the curve value of mean density to distinguish enostoses from UOM was 0,982. Using a cut-off of 881 HU for mean density, sensitivity was 98% and specificity 95%. Conclusion: The frequency of enostosis in this study is 89%. The average density identified can help to distinguish enostoses from UOM. Advances in knowledge: We report the exact frequency of enostosis.

Introduction Work Group Bibliographical Research Current regulations Considerations on radiological risks and containment strategies in x-ray examinations Diagnostic imaging for caries and periodontal disease Diagnostic imaging in orthodontics and gnathology Diagnostic imaging in cranio-maxillofacial malformations Ministry of Health Secretariat General Office 2 National Guidelines for Dental Diagnostic Imaging in the Developmental Age Diagnostic imaging in dental anomalies Diagnostic imaging in dental traumatology Table of Recommendations Glossary This document aims to support the dental professional in choosing the adequate diagnostic technique, minimising the radiation dose in observance of the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle (7). This principle states that the biological cost can only be justified when the benefit, that is, the diagnosis, outweighs the risk related to radiation exposure. In this guideline paper, we report recommendations for radiologists, medical physicists, paediatrician, dentists and maxillofacial surgeons, with reference to the specific fields. The diagnostic techniques considered in this paper are intraoral X-ray, orthopantomography (OPT), cephalometric (Ceph) x-ray and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). This work considers the Methodological Manual for National Guidelines System (2011), titled "How to produce, spread, and update Public Health Guidelines". Bibliographical research A systematic analysis of existing literature was carried out using PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases, with the following restrictions:

To retrospectively evaluate the frequency and type of findings that were missed in the original reports of multi-detector CT angiography (MDCTA) in patients with suspected acute bowel ischemia. From January 2007 to March 2011, a series of 35 patients who underwent MDCTA of the abdomen and pelvis and had surgery were included. The reports of the initial CT were retrospectively compared with the discharge diagnosis and surgical reports. Discrepant or missing findings were re-evaluated and divided into relevant or not relevant regarding the diagnosis. In 23 of the 35 patients (66 %), all findings were correctly diagnosed in the initial MDCTA report. In the remaining 12 of the 35 patients (34 %), lesions that were not reported were present at surgery. In 10 of the 12 (83 %) patients, the overlooked findings were relevant and subtle: gas in the portal vein (n = 3), gas in the bowel wall (n = 3), gas in the portal vein and bowel wall (n = 2), thrombotic occlusion of the superior mesenteric artery (n = 1), and thrombotic occlusion of the inferior mesenteric artery (n = 1). In 2 of the 12 (17 %) patients in whom the MDCTA-overlooked findings were classified as non-relevant, bowel ischemia was found at surgery. With retrospective image interpretation, 83 % of the patients with occlusive mesenteric ischemia at surgery were correctly identified, whereas the remaining 17 % with non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia at surgery showed non-relevant findings at MDCTA. About 33 % of relevant findings of bowel ischemia were overlooked by the initial MDCTA interpretation, most were subtle findings. However, secondary reading revealed most of these findings and can serve to improve diagnostic performance.