Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 199

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Exclusion of Unstable Cervical Spine Injury in Obtunded Patients with Blunt Trauma: Is MR Imaging Needed when Multi–Detector Row CT Findings Are Normal?

Hogan, Gerard J., Mirvis, Stuart E., Shanmuganathan, Kathirkamanathan, Scalea, Thomas M.·2005·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively determine what information, if any, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the cervical spine in obtunded and/or "unreliable" patients with blunt trauma adds to multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) of the entire cervical spine (including routine multiplanar sagittal and coronal reformations) when the CT findings are normal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was HIPAA compliant and institutional review board approved. Informed consent was not required. From April 2001 to November 2003, 1400 trauma patients underwent MR imaging of the cervical spine to evaluate potential cervical spine injuries. Multi-detector row CT of the cervical spine was performed with a four- or 16-detector row scanner. MR imaging of the cervical spine was performed with transverse gradient-echo, sagittal intermediate-weighted, sagittal short inversion time inversion-recovery, and sagittal T1- and T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences. Many MR examinations were performed to exclude soft-tissue injuries in the cervical spine of obtunded patients with blunt trauma in whom cervical spine injury could not be excluded with physical examination. Complete cervical spine MR studies were obtained to evaluate soft-tissue injuries in 366 obtunded patients with blunt trauma (281 male and 85 female patients; age range, 13-92 years; mean age, 42.1 years). The patients had previously undergone total cervical spine multi-detector row CT with normal findings. The results obtained with these two modalities were compared. RESULTS: MR images were negative for acute injury in 354 of the 366 patients and negative for cervical spine ligamentous injury in 362. Seven of the 366 patients had cervical cord contusions, four patients had ligamentous injuries, three patients had intervertebral disk edema, and one patient had a cord contusion, a ligamentous injury, and an intervertebral disk injury. Four patients had ligamentous injuries; however, all of these patients had ligament injuries limited to only one of the three columns of cervical spine ligament support. Multi-detector row CT had negative predictive values of 98.9% (362 of 366 patients) for ligament injury and 100% (366 of 366 patients) for unstable cervical spine injury. CONCLUSION: A normal multi-detector row CT scan of the total cervical spine in obtunded and/or "unreliable" patients with blunt trauma enabled the authors to exclude unstable injuries on the basis of findings at follow-up cervical spine MR imaging.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2371040697

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 199

Metadata

Authors
Hogan, G. J., Mirvis, S. E., Shanmuganathan, K., & Scalea, T. M.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2005-10
Volume
237
Issue
1
Pages
106-113
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2166050713
Cited by
199
References
0
FWCI
13.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exclusion of Unstable Cervical Spine Injury in Obtunded Patients with Blunt Trauma: Is MR Imaging Needed when Multi–Detector Row CT Findings Are Normal? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2371040697
The paper
Hogan, G. J., Mirvis, S. E., Shanmuganathan, K., & Scalea, T. M. (2005). Exclusion of Unstable Cervical Spine Injury in Obtunded Patients with Blunt Trauma: Is MR Imaging Needed when Multi–Detector Row CT Findings Are Normal? Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2371040697

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.