Are radiological modalities really necessary for the long-term follow-up of patients having blunt solid organ injuries? A single center study

Changes in Approach to Solid Organ Injury: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

“…There are no published guidelines on the follow-up imaging after NOM solid organ trauma, both in terms of the optimal patient population and the time interval to repeat imaging. 56,57 Although the approach to management has evolved, consensus is lacking with regard to when and whether follow-up imaging is required. Short-term follow-up in the days following injury can have multifactorial indications that account for variability, including change in patient’s clinical status (fever, pain, or hemodynamic instability), changes in blood tests, or routine based on initial injury grade, surgeon preference, or coexisting injuries.…”

“…Individual clinician experience and comfort with NOM is the factor that contributes most to this variability. 57 Routine postdischarge CT scans are felt to be often unnecessary and not cost-effective. 57 For follow-up imaging, a dual-phase CT protocol such as the initial trauma CT is preferred by a majority of institutions to best image both vascular and parenchymal complications.…”

“…57 Routine postdischarge CT scans are felt to be often unnecessary and not cost-effective. 57 For follow-up imaging, a dual-phase CT protocol such as the initial trauma CT is preferred by a majority of institutions to best image both vascular and parenchymal complications. 56 Excretory phase imaging is also recommended in cases of renal trauma for detection of collecting system injuries.…”