We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Vascular complications of penetrating brain injury: comparison of helical CT angiography and conventional angiography.
Journal of Neurosurgery 2014 November
OBJECT: The authors conducted a study to compare the sensitivity and specificity of helical CT angiography (CTA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in detecting intracranial arterial injuries after penetrating traumatic brain injury (PTBI).
METHODS: In a retrospective evaluation of 48 sets of angiograms from 45 consecutive patients with PTBI, 3 readers unaware of the DSA findings reviewed the CTA images to determine the presence or absence of arterial injuries. A fourth reader reviewed all the disagreements and decided among the 3 interpretations. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of CTA were calculated on a per-injury basis and in a subpopulation of patients with traumatic intracranial aneurysms (TICAs).
RESULTS: Sensitivity of CTA for detecting arterial injuries was 72.7% (95% CI 49.8%-89.3%); specificity, 93.5% (95% CI 78.6%-99.2%); PPV, 88.9% (95% CI 65.3%-98.6%); and NPV, 82.9% (95% CI 66.4%-93.4%). All 7 TICAs were correctly identified by CTA. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CTA in detecting TICAs were 100%. To compare agreement with DSA, the standard of reference, confidence scores categorized as low, intermediate, and high probability yielded an overall effectiveness of 77.8% (95% CI 71.8%-82.9%).
CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomography angiography had limited overall sensitivity in detecting arterial injuries in patients with PTBI. However, it was accurate in identifying TICAs, a subgroup of injuries usually managed by either surgical or endovascular approaches, and non-TICA injuries involving the first-order branches of intracranial arteries.
METHODS: In a retrospective evaluation of 48 sets of angiograms from 45 consecutive patients with PTBI, 3 readers unaware of the DSA findings reviewed the CTA images to determine the presence or absence of arterial injuries. A fourth reader reviewed all the disagreements and decided among the 3 interpretations. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of CTA were calculated on a per-injury basis and in a subpopulation of patients with traumatic intracranial aneurysms (TICAs).
RESULTS: Sensitivity of CTA for detecting arterial injuries was 72.7% (95% CI 49.8%-89.3%); specificity, 93.5% (95% CI 78.6%-99.2%); PPV, 88.9% (95% CI 65.3%-98.6%); and NPV, 82.9% (95% CI 66.4%-93.4%). All 7 TICAs were correctly identified by CTA. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CTA in detecting TICAs were 100%. To compare agreement with DSA, the standard of reference, confidence scores categorized as low, intermediate, and high probability yielded an overall effectiveness of 77.8% (95% CI 71.8%-82.9%).
CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomography angiography had limited overall sensitivity in detecting arterial injuries in patients with PTBI. However, it was accurate in identifying TICAs, a subgroup of injuries usually managed by either surgical or endovascular approaches, and non-TICA injuries involving the first-order branches of intracranial arteries.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app