Accuracy of Preoperative MDCT in Patients With Penetrating Abdominal and Pelvic Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the overall diagnostic accuracy of preoperative multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in penetrating abdominal and pelvic injuries (PAPI). Method and Materials: We used our hospitals’ trauma registry to retrospectively identify patients with PAPI from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2016. Only patients who had a 64-MDCT scan at presentation and subsequently underwent laparotomy or laparoscopy were included in our study cohort. Each finding noted on MDCT was rated using a 5-point scale to indicate certainty of injury, with a score of 0 being definitive. Using surgical findings as the gold standard, the accuracy of radiology reports was analyzed in 2 ways. A κ statistic was calculated to evaluate each pair of values for absolute agreement, and ratings for all organ systems were analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine whether radiology and surgical findings were similar enough to be clinically meaningful. Qualitative review of the radiology and surgical reports focused on the gastrointestinal (GI) tract was conducted. Results: Our cohort consisted of 38 males and 4 females with a median age of 29 years and a median injury severity score of 15.6. For this study, 12 different organ groups were categorized and analyzed. Of those organ groups, absolute agreement between MDCT and surgical findings was found only for liver and spleen (κ values ranging from 0.2 to 0.5). Additionally, the ANOVA revealed an interaction between finding type and organ system ( F 1, 33 = 7.4, P < .001). The most clinically significant discrepancies between MDCT and surgical findings were for gallbladder, bowel, mesenteric, and diaphragmatic injuries. Qualitative review of the GI tract revealed that radiologists can detect significant findings such as presence of injury, however, localization and extent of injury pose a challenge. Conclusion: The detection of clinically significant injuries to solid organs in trauma patients with PAPI on 64-MDCT is adequate. However, detection of injury to the remaining organ groups on MDCT, especially bowel, mesentery, and diaphragm, remains a challenge.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".