PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the true incidence of cervical artery dissections (CeADs) in trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of ≥16, since head-and-neck computed tomography angiogram (CTA) is not a compulsory component of whole-body trauma computed tomography (CT) protocols.Patients and methodsA total of 230 consecutive trauma patients with an ISS of ≥16 admitted to our Level I trauma center during a 24-month period were prospectively included. Standardized whole-body CT in a 256-detector row scanner included a head-and-neck CTA. Incidence, mortality, patient and trauma characteristics, and concomitant injuries were recorded and analyzed retrospectively in patients with carotid artery dissection (CAD) and vertebral artery dissection (VAD).ResultsOf the 230 patients included, 6.5% had a CeAD, 5.2% had a CAD, and 1.7% had a VAD. One patient had both CAD and VAD. For both, CAD and VAD, mortality is 25%. One death was caused by fatal cerebral ischemia due to high-grade CAD. A total of 41.6% of the patients with traumatic CAD and 25% of the patients with VAD had neurological sequelae.ConclusionMandatory head-and-neck CTA yields higher CeAD incidence than reported before. We highly recommend the compulsory inclusion of a head-and-neck CTA to whole-body CT routines for severely injured patients.

Background In severely injured trauma patients, non-penetrating aortic arch injuries (NAAI) have a remarkable incidence and mortality. Both diagnostics and therapy of NAAI recently underwent significant changes. Purpose To assess mortality, morbidity, and the risk factors associated with NAAI in severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score [ISS] ≥16) under the light of recent technical and procedural advances in trauma care. Material and Methods A total of 230 consecutive trauma patients with ISS ≥16 admitted to our level-I trauma center during a 24-month period, were prospectively included and underwent standardized whole-body computed tomography (CT) in a 2 × 128-detector-row scanner. Incidence, mortality, patient and trauma characteristics, and concomitant injuries were recorded for patients with NAAI. Localization of NAAI was described referring to Mitchell and Ishimaru; severity was graded according to the proposal of Heneghan et al. Results Thirteen of 230 patients had a NAAI, yielding an incidence of 5.6%. Mean age and ISS was not elevated in NAAI (44.4 ± 14.8 years, ISS = 38 ± 12.4). Mortality was 23.1%. One patient had severe neurologic sequelae from a stroke; all surviving patients had to undergo (transient) anticoagulant therapy. Trauma mechanism was of high kinetic energy in all cases. Concomitant injuries were predominantly thoracic (rib fractures = 76.9%, thoracic spine fracture = 38.5%). Conclusion Whenever an individual possibly encountered a deceleration-acceleration trauma mechanism, a high level of suspicion for NAAI should be maintained. It remains to be determined whether recent advances in mortality are due to changes in trauma care or due to improved vehicle and road safety.

PurposeTo assess biomechanical factors in aortic arch geometry contributing to the development of non-penetrating aortic arch injury (NAAI) in multiply injured patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16.Material and methods230 consecutive multiply injured trauma patients with an ISS ≥ 16 admitted to our Level-I trauma center during a consecutive 24-month period were prospectively included of whom 13 presented with NAAI (5.7%). Standardized whole-body CT in a 2x128-detector-row scanner included a head-and-neck CTA. Aortic arch diameters, width, height, angles and thoracic width and height were measured in individuals with NAAI and ISS-, sex-, age-, and trauma mechanism-matched controls.ResultsThere was no difference between groups regarding sex, age, ISS, and aortic diameters. The aortic arch angle in individuals with NAAI (71.3° ± 14.9°) was larger than in healthy control (60.7° ± 8.6°; p*<0.05). In patients with NAAI, the distance between ascendent and descendent aorta was larger (5.2 cm ± 1.9 cm) than in control (2.8 ± 0.5 cm; ***p<0.001). The aortic arch is higher above tracheal bifurcation in NAAI (3.6 cm ± 0.6 cm) than in matched control (2.4 cm ± 0.3 cm; ***p<0.001). Accordingly, the area under the aortic arch, calculated as half of an eliptic shape, is significantly larger in patients with NAAI (15.0 cm2 ± 6.5 cm2) when compared to age- and sex-matched controls without NAAI (5.5 cm2 ± 1.3 cm2; ***p<0.001).ConclusionBesides the magnitude of deceleration and direction of impact, width and height of the aortic arch are the 3rd and 4th factor directly contributing to the risk of developing traumatic NAAI in severely injured patients.

No abstract