We have located links that may give you full text access.
Trust the FAST: Confirmation that the FAST examination is highly specific for intra-abdominal hemorrhage in over 1,200 patients with pelvic fractures.
Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 2021 January 2
BACKGROUND: Use of the focused assessment with sonography for trauma (FAST) examination in patients with pelvic fractures has been reported as unreliable. We hypothesized that FAST is a reliable method for detecting clinically significant intra-abdominal hemorrhage in patients with pelvic fractures.
METHODS: All patients with pelvic fractures over a 10-year period were reviewed at a Level I trauma center. The predictive ability of FAST was assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value against the criterion standard of either computed tomography (CT) or laparotomy findings. The FAST examination was considered "false negative" if findings at laparotomy indicated traumatic intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Likewise, the FAST examination was considered "false positive" if either CT or findings at laparotomy indicated no intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Hemodynamic instability scores were calculated for all patients.
RESULTS: There were 1,456 patients with pelvic fractures and an initial FAST reviewed; 1,219 (83.7%) underwent FAST and either CT or operative exploration. Median age was 43 years (interquartile range, 26-56 years) and mean Injury Severity Score was 18.5 ± 12.3. The sensitivity and specificity for FAST in this group of patients with pelvic fracture was 85.4% and 98.1%, respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 78.4% and 98.8%, respectively. Of 21 patients with a false-positive FAST, 15 (71.4%) were confirmed with a negative CT scan, and 6 (28.6%) underwent laparotomy without findings of intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Of 13 patients with a false-negative FAST, all were identified with positive findings at the time of laparotomy. The specificity of the FAST examination remained high regardless of hemodynamic instability score grade.
CONCLUSION: The false positive rate of FAST examination for intra-abdominal hemorrhage is 1.1%. These data suggest that a positive FAST in this clinical scenario should be considered to represent intra-abdominal fluid. This series contradicts prior reports that FAST is unreliable in patients with pelvic fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, level III.
METHODS: All patients with pelvic fractures over a 10-year period were reviewed at a Level I trauma center. The predictive ability of FAST was assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value against the criterion standard of either computed tomography (CT) or laparotomy findings. The FAST examination was considered "false negative" if findings at laparotomy indicated traumatic intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Likewise, the FAST examination was considered "false positive" if either CT or findings at laparotomy indicated no intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Hemodynamic instability scores were calculated for all patients.
RESULTS: There were 1,456 patients with pelvic fractures and an initial FAST reviewed; 1,219 (83.7%) underwent FAST and either CT or operative exploration. Median age was 43 years (interquartile range, 26-56 years) and mean Injury Severity Score was 18.5 ± 12.3. The sensitivity and specificity for FAST in this group of patients with pelvic fracture was 85.4% and 98.1%, respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 78.4% and 98.8%, respectively. Of 21 patients with a false-positive FAST, 15 (71.4%) were confirmed with a negative CT scan, and 6 (28.6%) underwent laparotomy without findings of intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Of 13 patients with a false-negative FAST, all were identified with positive findings at the time of laparotomy. The specificity of the FAST examination remained high regardless of hemodynamic instability score grade.
CONCLUSION: The false positive rate of FAST examination for intra-abdominal hemorrhage is 1.1%. These data suggest that a positive FAST in this clinical scenario should be considered to represent intra-abdominal fluid. This series contradicts prior reports that FAST is unreliable in patients with pelvic fracture.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, level III.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
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