The accuracy of FAST in relation to grade of solid organ injuries: a retrospective analysis of 226 trauma patients with liver or splenic lesion

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the role of a negative FAST in the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm of multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 226 multiply injured patients with liver or splenic lesions treated at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland. RESULTS: FAST failed to detect free fluid or organ lesions in 45 of 226 patients with spleen or liver injuries (sensitivity 80.1%). Overall specificity was 99.5%. The positive and negative predictive values were 99.4% and 83.3%. The overall likelihood ratios for a positive and negative FAST were 160.2 and 0.2. Grade III-V organ lesions were detected more frequently than grade I and II lesions. Without the additional diagnostic accuracy of a CT scan, the mean ISS of the FAST-false-negative patients would be significantly underestimated and 7 previously unsuspected intra-abdominal injuries would have been missed. CONCLUSION: FAST is an expedient tool for the primary assessment of polytraumatized patients to rule out high grade intra-abdominal injuries. However, the low overall diagnostic sensitivity of FAST may lead to underestimated injury patterns and delayed complications may occur. Hence, in hemodynamically stable patients with abdominal trauma, an early CT scan should be considered and one must be aware of the potential shortcomings of a "negative FAST"

Preoperative Characteristics of Patients with Presumed Pancreatic Cancer but Ultimately Benign Disease:A Multicenter Series of 344 Pancreatoduodenectomies

Preoperative differentiation between malignant and benign pancreatic tumors can be difficult. Consequently, a proportion of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy will ultimately have benign disease. The aim of this study was to compare preoperative clinical and diagnostic characteristics of patients with unexpected benign disease after pancreatoduodenectomy with those of patients with confirmed (pre)malignant disease. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study in 1,629 consecutive patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy between 2003 and 2010 in 11 Dutch centers. Preoperative characteristics were compared in a benign:malignant ratio of 1:3. Malignant cases were selected from the entire cohort by using a random number list. A multivariable logistic regression prediction model was constructed to predict benign disease. Of 107 patients (6.6 %) with unexpected benign disease after pancreatoduodenectomy, 86 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were compared with 258 patients with (pre)malignant disease. Patients with benign disease presented more often with pain (56 vs. 38 %; P = 0.004), but less frequently with jaundice (60 vs. 80 %; P <0.01), a pancreatic mass (13 vs. 54 %, P <0.001), or a double duct sign on computed tomography (21 vs. 47 %; P <0.001). In a prediction model using these parameters, only 19 % of patients with benign disease were correctly predicted, and 1.4 % of patients with malignant disease were missed. Nearly 7 % of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy were ultimately diagnosed with benign disease. Although some preoperative clinical and imaging characteristics might indicate absence of malignancy, their discriminatory value is insufficient for clinical use