Rui SUN, Jing TİAN, Xingshun Qİ, He ZHANG, Jinsong HAN, Hai JİN, Hui LU

Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma for Assessment of Injury in Military Settings: A Meta-analysis

Background: Non-invasive, rapid, and precise assessment of injuryin the military settings is extremely important, yet difficult. Focusedassessment with sonography in trauma (FAST) is being increasinglyemployed for assessing the location and severity of injury and guidingfurther treatment strategy. However, the evidence regarding the utilityof FAST in the military settings is scattered.Aims: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of FAST in theassessment of injury in the military settings.Study Design: Meta-analysis.Methods: We identified all relevant papers via the PubMed,EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. We evaluated the qualityof included studies by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic AccuracyStudies-2 tool. We pooled the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity,specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnosticodds ratio as the effect sizes, followed by evaluating the heterogeneityamong the studies by p value and I2.Results: Among the 39 papers, a total of six papers were included. Thesample size ranged from 15 to 396. The AUC of FAST for assessingthe injury was 0.85. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive andnegative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.66, 0.98,33.1, 0.34, and 97, respectively. The heterogeneity among the studieswas statistically significant (p=0.006, I2=78%).Conclusion: FAST is potentially valuable for assessing injury in themilitary settings. Due to its high specificity, FAST may be appropriateto rule in significant injury. However, because of its poor sensitivity,the ability of FAST to rule out injury cannot be relied upon.

PDF

___

1. Loria FL. Historical perspective of penetrating wounds of the abdomen. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1948;87:521-49.
2. Demetriades D. Civilian and Military Trauma: Training to Successfully Intervene and Save Lives. J Am Coll Surg 2018;227:555-63.
3. Shaftan GW. Indications for operation in abdominal trauma. Am J Surg 1960;99:657- 64.
4. Renz BM, Feliciano DV. Unnecessary laparotomies for trauma: a prospective study of morbidity. J Trauma 1995;38:350-6.
5. Renz BM, Feliciano DV. The length of hospital stay after an unnecessary laparotomy for trauma: a prospective study. J Trauma 1996;40:187-90.
6. Sosa JL. Unnecessary laparotomies for trauma: a prospective study of morbidity. J Trauma 1995;39:397-8.
7. Demetriades D, Vandenbossche P, Ritz M, Goodmann D, Kowalszik J. Nontherapeutic operations for penetrating trauma: early morbidity and mortality. Br J Surg 1993;80:860-1.
8. Saha S, Scriven MW. Non-therapeutic operations for penetrating trauma: early morbidity and mortality. Br J Surg 1993;80:1626.
9. Mitchell TA, Hutchison T, Becker TE, Aden JK, Blackbourne L, White CE. Nontherapeutic laparotomy in American combat casualties: a 10-year review. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2014;77(3 Suppl 2):171-5.
10. Hardaway RM. Viet Nam wound analysis. J Trauma 1978;18:635-43.
11. Ramoutsaki IA, Giannacos EN, Livadas GN. Birth of battlefield radiology: GrecoTurkish War of 1897. Radiographics 2001;21:263-6.
12. Gay DA, Miles RM. Use of imaging in trauma decision-making. J R Army Med Corps 2011;157(3Suppl 1):289-92.
13. Muck AE, Givens M, Bebarta VS, Mason PE, Goolsby C. Emergency Physicians at War. West J Emerg Med 2018;19:542-7.
14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009;339:2535.
15. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:529-36.
16. Brooks AJ, Price V, Simms M. FAST on operational military deployment. Emerg Med J 2005;22:263-5.
17. Beck-Razi N, Fischer D, Michaelson M, Engel A, Gaitini D. The utility of focused assessment with sonography for trauma as a triage tool in multiple-casualty incidents during the second Lebanon war. J Ultrasound Med 2007;26:1149-56.
18. Smith IM, Naumann DN, Marsden ME, Ballard M, Bowley DM. Scanning and War: Utility of FAST and CT in the Assessment of Battlefield Abdominal Trauma. Ann Surg 2015;262:389-96.
19. Tummers W, van Schuppen J, Langeveld H, Wilde J, Banderker E, van As A. Role of focused assessment with sonography for trauma as a screening tool for blunt abdominal trauma in young children after high energy trauma. S Afr J Surg 2016;54:28-34.
20. Waheed KB, Baig AA, Raza A, Ul Hassan MZ, Khattab MA, Raza U. Diagnostic accuracy of Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma for blunt abdominal trauma in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J 2018;39:598-602.
21. Carter NJ, Gay D. FAST in the deployed military setting. J R Army Med Corps 2018;164:332-4.
22. Quinn AC, Sinert R. What is the utility of the Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma (FAST) exam in penetrating torso trauma? Injury 2011;42:482-7.
23. Stengel D, Rademacher G, Ekkernkamp A, Guthoff C, Mutze S. Emergency ultrasound-based algorithms for diagnosing blunt abdominal trauma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD004446.
24. Stengel D, Leisterer J, Ferrada P, Ekkernkamp A, Mutze S, Hoenning A. Point-ofcare ultrasonography for diagnosing thoracoabdominal injuries in patients with blunt trauma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;12:CD012669.