Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40511108›Full record

ReviewJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025

Comprehensive Review of Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) in the Assessment of Blunt Cervical Spine Trauma in Adults.

Akash Kumbhalkar, Nikhita Dhange, Neha Nawale, Sanket Mahajan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. [Cervical spine fractures].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Akash KumbhalkarMaster in Health Administration, School of Allied Health Sciences, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, Maharashtra, India.
Nikhita DhangeMaster in Health Administration, School of Allied Health Sciences, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, Maharashtra, India.
Neha NawaleMaster in Health Administration, School of Allied Health Sciences, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, Maharashtra, India.
Sanket MahajanMaster in Health Administration, School of Allied Health Sciences, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the release of 64-section computed tomographic (CT) scanners in 2004, there have been several new advancements in cervical spine imaging. A growing trend in polytrauma patients with obtain-dating is the use of multidetector CT as a stand-alone screening test to rule out cervical injuries. Spine surgeons are beginning to adopt the SLIC (Subaxial Injury Classification and Scoring) method for the cervical spine based on CT and MR imaging data. Multidetector CT is currently being used to reassess radiographic parameters that were previously established for the evaluation of craniocervical distraction injuries. Even while most blunt trauma patients are presently managed without surgery, procedures for management have changed to favor surgical intervention because of improved surgical techniques, hardware, and breakthroughs in our understanding of spinal stability. For this reason, radiologists need to be aware of this. Cervical spine imaging has significantly improved since the introduction of 64-section computed tomography (CT) scanners in 2004. MDCT has become a single imaging modality of significance in the evaluation of polytrauma patients, especially those who are obtunded to assess for cervical spine injury. The recent generation of Subaxial Injury Classification and Scoring (SLIC) based on CT and MRI is establishing itself among spine surgeons. Regarding craniocervical distraction injuries, the role of MDCT is also being rediscussed. Cervical spine injuries that are found in 5-10% of the cases of blunt trauma affect the spinal cord and require more demanding investigations because of a high rate of noncontiguous lesions. MDCT is increasingly used in cervical spine clearance because of the higher sensitivity compared with radiography in patients with other injuries that distract the cervical spine. Cervical spine CT is recommended in these cases by the American College of Radiology. The superiority of MR imaging in identifying disc and ligament abnormalities is counterbalanced by the higher false-positive study rates and modest effect on management; for this reason, MDCT remains preferable for screening purposes. CD as a form of ligamentous injury with neurological deficit as its component signifies the value of an MDCT scan in its early diagnosis. Occipital condyle injuries as a sign of high-tied trauma and atlas and axis fractures, highly stable and some of which require different treatment, also enable further improvement of MDCT detection. Current diagnostic imaging has replaced radiography mostly because of better visualization and sensitivity, especially among high-risk patient groups. In conclusion, MDCT can be advocated as the gold standard in the primary assessment of blunt cervical spine injury due to improved and sensitive diagnostic performance. At the same time, the radiation dose issue remains the current radiologist challenge.

Indexed as

CervicalCT scaninjuriesmultidetector CTspine

Identifiers

PMID40511108
PMCPMC12156676

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.