The utility of cross‐sectional imaging in the management of suspected scaphoid fractures

• Published in: Journal of medical radiation sciences Vol. 66; no. 1; pp. 30 - 37
• Main Authors: Wijetunga, Asanka R., Tsang, Venessa H., Giuffre, Bruno
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.03.2019; John Wiley & Sons, Inc; John Wiley and Sons Inc; Wiley
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Child; Computed tomography; Diagnosis; Female; Fractures; Fractures, Bone - diagnostic imaging; Humans; Immobilization; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Medical imaging; Middle Aged; Multimodal Imaging; NMR; Nuclear magnetic resonance; Original; Outpatient care facilities; Patients; Radiography; Retrospective Studies; Risk; scaphoid bone; Scaphoid Bone - diagnostic imaging; Scaphoid Bone - injuries; Studies; Surveillance; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Wrist; wrist injuries; X‐rays; Young Adult; scaphoid bone; magnetic resonance imaging; Fractures; wrist injuries; X-rays
• DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.302
• ISSN: 2051-3895

Introduction Scaphoid fractures are the commonest carpal bone fracture. If untreated they pose significant risk to patients, thus if a scaphoid fracture is suspected, patients are managed with immobilisation. Although scaphoid fractures may be difficult to diagnose on plain radiography, sometimes for months after injury, ongoing radiographic surveillance is preferred due to its low upfront cost. Patients in immobilising casts for long periods experience significant personal and social ramifications such as difficulty working and self‐caring. This study examines whether cross‐sectional imaging by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is quicker than serial X‐ray surveillance at allowing a scaphoid fracture to be either excluded or confirmed. Methods A retrospective record review was performed of the 1709 patients who presented to Royal North Shore Hospital in 2015 with wrist injuries, finding 104 patients clinically suspicious for a fractured scaphoid. Results All patients were examined by X‐ray during their initial hospital presentation, providing 33.7% of final diagnoses in 0.6 ± 1.7 days. However, if initial X‐ray proved inconclusive, subsequent serial X‐ray surveillance made a final diagnosis after a mean of 24.1 ± 17.2 days, with some being immobilised for up to 67 days before diagnosis. Cross‐sectional imaging significantly reduced diagnosis time to 9.8 ± 5.8 days (P = 0.0016), with a maximum immobilisation time of 24 days. Conclusion Cross‐sectional imaging allows for faster scaphoid fracture diagnosis than X‐ray. We propose a protocol for scaphoid fracture diagnosis wherein patients undergo two episodes of X‐ray separated by 7 days, followed by a single MRI if clinical suspicion remains, minimising unnecessary immobilisation. Delayed scaphoid fracture diagnosis is a cause of significant inconvenience to patients. This paper highlights the need for a scaphoid fracture diagnosis protocol, with patients being made to wait in immobilising casts for up to 67 days without a definitive diagnosis if X‐ray alone is used. When cross‐sectional imaging techniques are applied, a final diagnosis is reached much more rapidly, reducing the incidence of unnecessary wrist immobilisation.