| HOME | HELP | E-MAIL ALERTS | SEARCH |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PEDIATRICS Vol. 105 No. 6 June 2000, pp. 1345-1348
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
Top
Abstract
Conclusion
References
|
|---|
The role of imaging in cases of child abuse is to identify the extent of physical injury when abuse occurs, as well as to elucidate all imaging findings that point to alternative diagnoses. Diagnostic imaging of child abuse is based on both advances in imaging technology, as well as a better understanding of the subject based on scientific data obtained during the past 10 years.1-3 The initial recommendation was published in Pediatrics (1991;87:262-264).
The concept of child abuse as a medical entity has its
origin in the studies of the pediatric radiologist, John Caffey,
MD,4 as well as many other specialists in the field of
diagnostic imaging. Kempe5 relied heavily on the work of
Caffey and his protégé, Frederick Silverman,
MD,6 when developing the familiar concept of the
"battered child syndrome." When all cases of child abuse and
neglect are studied, the incidence of physical evidence documented by
diagnostic imaging studies is relatively small. However, imaging
studies are often critical in the assessment of infant and young child
with evidence of physical injury, and they also may be the first
indication of abuse in a child who is seen with an apparent natural
illness. When viewed in conjunction with clinical and laboratory
studies, imaging findings commonly provide support for allegations of
abuse.7 For severely abused infants, the imaging findings
alone may form the basis for a diagnosis of the inflicted injury. The
role of imaging in cases of suspected abuse is not only to identify the
extent of physical injury when abuse has occurred, but also to
elucidate all imaging findings that point to alternative
diagnoses.8,9 As most conventional imaging studies
performed in these settings are noninvasive and entail minimal
radiation risks,10 recommendations about imaging should
focus on examinations that provide the highest diagnostic yield at
acceptable cost.11
Although skeletal injuries rarely pose a threat to the life of the
abused child, they are often the strongest radiologic
indicators of abuse. In fact, in an infant, certain patterns of injury
are sufficiently characteristic to permit a firm diagnosis of inflicted injury in the absence of clinical information.12 This fact
mandates that imaging surveys performed to identify skeletal injury be
performed with at least the same level of technical excellence
routinely used to evaluate accidental injuries. The "body gram" (a
study that encompasses the entire infant or young child on 1 or 2 radiographic exposures) or abbreviated skeletal surveys have no role in
the imaging of these subtle but highly specific bony abnormalities.
Equipment
In general, the radiographic skeletal survey is the method of
choice for global skeletal imaging in cases of suspected
abuse.13 Low-dose all-purpose pediatric imaging systems
provide insufficient anatomic detail to image the skeleton of the
infant and young child. The American College of Radiology has published
standards for skeletal survey imaging in cases of suspected abuse.
Modern pediatric imaging systems commonly use special film cassettes and intensifying screens to minimize exposure. Although these low-dose
systems are adequate for chest and abdominal imaging, they fail to
provide the necessary contrast and spatial resolution to image subtle
metaphyseal, rib, and other high specificity injuries that are
characteristic of abuse. According to the American College of
Radiology, imaging systems used for suspected abuse of infants should
have a spatial resolution of at least 10 line pairs per millimeter and
a speed of no more than 200.13 These systems should be
used without a grid. Beyond infancy, faster general purpose systems are
required for thicker body regions (eg, skull, lateral lumbar spine).
Digital or filmless radiology is beginning to replace film screen
radiography in some centers. Data are limited about the suitability of
this technique for the evaluation of inflicted skeletal injury. This
technique should be shown to perform comparably to high-detail film
screen radiography before it is used routinely for suspected child
abuse. In any case, an experienced radiologist must monitor the
radiographic examination of the skeleton to ensure that appropriate
high-resolution images are obtained.
Imaging Protocol
Once the appropriate imaging system is chosen, a precise protocol
for skeletal imaging must be developed to ensure consistent quality. In
routine skeletal imaging, an accepted principle is that film must be
coned or restricted to the specific anatomic area of interest. It is
common practice to encompass larger anatomic regions when skeletal
surveys are performed, and this results in areas of underexposure and
overexposure, as well as loss of resolution resulting from geometric
distortion and other technical factors. The standard skeletal survey
imaging protocol that has been developed by the American College of
Radiology is given in Table
1.13 Of special note is the
inclusion of lateral views of the spine to assess for vertebral
fractures and dislocations and separate views of the hands and feet to
identify subtle digital injuries. Anteroposterior and lateral views of the skull are mandatory even when cranial computed tomography (CT) has
been performed, because skull fractures coursing in the axial plane may
be missed with axial CT. Studies must be monitored by a radiologist for
technical adequacy. Skeletal injuries, especially those requiring
orthopedic management, necessitate at least 2 radiographic projections.
Oblique views of the thorax increase the yield for the detection of rib
fractures. Recent evidence suggests that a follow-up skeletal survey
approximately 2 weeks after the initial study increases the diagnostic
yield,14 and this procedure should be considered when
abuse is strongly suspected. The repeated study may permit more precise
determination of the age of individual injuries. Lack of interval
change may indicate that the initial radiographic finding is a normal
anatomic variant or is related to a bone dysplasia.
TABLE 1
SKELETAL TRAUMA
THE RADIOGRAPHIC SKELETAL SURVEY
The Standard Skeletal
Survey13
Radionuclide Bone Scans
When performed by staff experienced with pediatric nuclear imaging, skeletal scintigraphy may offer an alternative or an adjunct to the radiographic skeletal survey in selected cases, particularly in children older than 1 year. Scintigraphy seems to provide increased sensitivity for detecting rib fractures, subtle shaft fractures, and areas of early periosteal elevation. However, data are limited about the sensitivity of scintigraphy for classic metaphyseal lesions of abuse, particularly when the lesions are bilateral, as well as subtle spinal injuries, features that carry a high specificity for abuse in infants.15,16 Skeletal scintigraphy usually requires sedation and is generally more expensive than radiographic surveys. Bone scans often are used to supplement radiographic skeletal surveys in the acute care setting, but for the child who is placed in a "safe" environment, a follow-up skeletal survey is an attractive alternative to initial scintigraphy. If radionuclide bone scans are performed as the initial study, all positive areas must be evaluated further with radiography, and because scintigraphy is insensitive for detecting cranial injuries, skull radiography in at least 2 projections must supplement the bone scan.
Imaging Guidelines
The skeletal survey is mandatory in all cases of suspected physical abuse in children younger than 2 years. The screening skeletal survey or bone scan has little value in children older than 5 years. Patients in the 2- to 5-year-old group must be handled individually based on the specific clinical indicators of abuse. At any age, when clinical findings point to a specific site of injury, the customary radiographic protocol for imaging that anatomic region should be used.
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)17 and sonography may be indicated when epiphyseal separations are suspected based on plain film results. Application of these guidelines to selected cases of neglect and sexual abuse is appropriate when associated physical maltreatment is suspected. Evidence suggests that if 1 infant twin is injured, the other is at risk, and, therefore, a skeletal survey is advisable in such cases.
| |
HEAD TRAUMA |
|---|
High-energy forces associated with impact or violent shaking result in a variety of central nervous system injuries that can be detected by modern neuroimaging techniques. The evolution of these injuries, as well as processes developing secondary to the original insult, often are effectively displayed on serial imaging studies.18
All infants and children with suspected intracranial injury must undergo cranial CT or MRI, or both. Strategies should be directed toward the detection of all intracranial sequelae of abuse and neglect with a thorough characterization of the extent and age of the abnormalities.19 In the acute care setting, efforts are directed toward rapid detection of treatable conditions. Subsequent studies are designed to more fully delineate all abnormalities, determine the timing of the injuries, and monitor their evolution.
| |
CT |
|---|
The CT without intravenous contrast should be performed as part of the initial evaluation for suspected inflicted head injury. It has a high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing acute intraparenchymal, subarachnoid, subdural, and epidural hemorrhage. Abnormalities that require emergency surgical intervention generally are well-demonstrated. The CT is readily available and rapidly performed for critically ill patients. The CT is better than MRI for evaluation of acute hemorrhage. Associated skull and facial fractures also can be diagnosed with appropriate bone window setting images.
| |
SONOGRAPHY |
|---|
Sonography via the anterior fontanelle in young infants has gained a limited but important role for assessing the short- and long-term consequences of inflicted head injury. Subcortical white matter tears in the frontal and anterior parietal parasagittal regions can be demonstrated with this technique.20 These lesions are less well-defined by CT, and sonography provides the advantage of a bedside technique. Because sonography reliably differentiates convexity subdural from subarachnoid collections, it is particularly useful for the infant with macrocephaly or any infant with large cerebral convexity collections demonstrated by CT.21 Because sonography is insensitive for detecting small acute subdural hematomas, particularly within the interhemispheric fissure, and many other acute intracranial injuries, it must be performed in conjunction with CT or MRI, or both.17,22
| |
MRI |
|---|
The MRI is the best modality to fully assess intracranial injury, including extra-axial collections, intraparenchymal hemorrhages, contusions, shear injuries, and brain swelling, or edema. Imaging should be performed with T1 and T2 weighting with proton-density or inversion-recovery sequences to differentiate cerebrospinal fluid collections from other water-containing lesions. Gradient echo sequences should be included to detect hemorrhage or mineralization not demonstrable by other MRI techniques. Although the specific type and order of pulse sequences may vary, imaging must be performed at least in the axial and coronal planes. Because MRI may fail to detect acute subarachnoid or subdural hemorrhage, its use should be delayed for 5 to 7 days in acutely ill children. Diffusion imaging is a new and valuable technique for the evaluation of stroke and likely will have a role in the assessment of inflicted cerebral injury. Abused infants may not demonstrate neurologic signs and symptoms, despite significant central nervous system injury. The MRI offers the highest sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing subacute and chronic injury and should be considered whenever typical skeletal injuries associated with shaking or impact are identified.17,23
| |
SPINAL TRAUMA |
|---|
Plain radiographs are often sufficient to evaluate vertebral compression and spinous process fractures. Complex fractures may require thin-section CT with multiplanar reformatted images. If a fracture or subluxation may compromise the spinal contents or if clinical findings indicate spinal cord or nerve root injury, MRI should be performed.
| |
THORACOABDOMINAL TRAUMA |
|---|
Blunt thoracoabdominal injury may occur in victims of child abuse. The evaluation and management of the acute problem is the same as for children with accidental injuries.24 However, when an infant or child sustains serious injury to the chest or abdomen without a known or observed mechanism, investigation of potential child abuse is warranted. Pancreatitis, duodenal hematomas, bowel perforation, and thoracoabdominal injury associated with rib fracture heighten the suspicion of child abuse. Unsubstantiated stories, such as falling out of bed, sibling stepping on infant, and rolling onto a child sleeping in bed, also should arouse suspicion of child abuse.
Chest, abdominal, and cervical spine radiographs often are obtained in the initial assessment of injured children. If internal chest or abdominal injury is suspected and the patient's condition is stable, a CT scan should be performed. A CT scan will best demonstrate many of the injuries associated with child abuse. The chest should be included if serious chest trauma is suspected.
The use of oral contrast is debatable. Oral contrast in the stomach and small bowel is useful to better define the lesser sac of the peritoneum, pancreas, and duodenum and jejunum. However, oral contrast may place the patient at greater risk of aspirating, especially if the patient is obtunded, sedated, or immobilized. If surgery or general anesthesia is likely, it is better to have an empty stomach.
Intravenous contrast is used routinely. Vascular injuries and injuries to the liver, spleen, pancreas, and kidneys are best demonstrated after administration of intravenous contrast material. Helical or dynamic axial scanning techniques with proper timing of the intravenous contrast bolus are important for accurate diagnosis. The only relative contraindications for intravenous contrast are a strong history of allergy to iodine, severe shock, and renal failure.
Abused children suffer some of the same injuries as children with accidental blunt trauma. In the chest, pulmonary contusion, pneumothorax, pleural effusion, rib fractures, vascular, or tracheobronchial injuries may occur. Abused children have an increased occurrence of pancreatic injuries and duodenal hematomas. Bowel injury should be suspected when there is peritoneal fluid without evidence of solid organ injury and when free intraperitoneal air or contrast is observed. Bone windows should be monitored not only for rib fractures, but also for signs of pelvic or spine fractures.
Peritoneal lavage rarely is used in pediatric practice. If performed before CT, it may decrease the diagnostic usefulness. It sometimes is used when emergency surgery is required to treat a patient whose condition is not stable enough for a CT scan.24
The use of ultrasonography in pediatric trauma is controversial. Some institutions have used ultrasonography successfully for a more detailed, comprehensive evaluation of organ injury. However, for seriously injured children and those with suspected child abuse, CT scanning is the preferred initial diagnostic modality of choice in majority of the institutions. Peritoneal fluid alone, which can be detected well in both with ultrasonography and CT scan, is a poor predictor of major trauma in children. An upper gastrointestinal series sometimes is used to evaluate and follow-up duodenal hematomas.
Nonoperative management of injury to the liver, spleen, kidney, or pancreas is common in most pediatric centers. Follow-up imaging usually is limited but may be useful to help determine recommendations for the level of physical activity (Table 2).
|
| |
CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
Top
Abstract
Conclusion
References
|
|---|
In summary, thoracoabdominal trauma in abused children should be evaluated and managed similar to accidental trauma. Abuse should be suspected and appropriate investigations initiated when the injury, clinical history, or the findings on the diagnostic imaging studies suggest the possibility of child abuse or nonaccidental injury.
SECTION ON RADIOLOGY, 1999-2000
Shashikant M. Sane, MD, Chairperson
Paul K. Kleinman, MD
Ronald A. Cohen, MD
Michael A. Di Pietro, MD
Joanna J. Seibert, MD
Beverly P. Wood, MD
Michael J. Zerin, MD
EX-OFFICIO
Richard Gravis, MD
STAFF
Karen Schell
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
The recommendations in this statement do not indicate an exclusive course of treatment or serve as a standard of medical care. Variations, taking into account individual circumstances, may be appropriate.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
Top
Abstract
Conclusion
References
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  P. L. Kleinman, D. Zurakowski, K. J. Strauss, R. H. Cleveland, J. M. Perez-Rosello, D. P. Nichols, K. H. Zou, and P. K. Kleinman Detection of Simulated Inflicted Metaphyseal Fractures in a Fetal Pig Model: Image Optimization and Dose Reduction with Computed Radiography Radiology, May 1, 2008; 247(2): 381 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. K. Kleinman "The Roentgen Manifestations of Unrecognized Skeletal Trauma in Infants"--A Commentary Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2008; 190(3): 559 - 560. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. A. Campbell, R. P. Berger, L. Ettaro, and M. S. Roberts Cost-effectiveness of Head Computed Tomography in Infants With Possible Inflicted Traumatic Brain Injury Pediatrics, August 1, 2007; 120(2): 295 - 304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. D. Kellogg and and the Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect Evaluation of Suspected Child Physical Abuse Pediatrics, June 1, 2007; 119(6): 1232 - 1241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Jenny and for the Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect Evaluating Infants and Young Children With Multiple Fractures Pediatrics, September 1, 2006; 118(3): 1299 - 1303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
American Academy of Pediatrics, K. P. Hymel, and the Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, and National Association of Medical Examiners Distinguishing Sudden Infant Death Syndrome From Child Abuse Fatalities Pediatrics, July 1, 2006; 118(1): 421 - 427. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S Datta, N Stoodley, S Jayawant, S Renowden, and A Kemp Neuroradiological aspects of subdural haemorrhages Arch. Dis. Child., September 1, 2005; 90(9): 947 - 951. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. L. Kleinman, P. K. Kleinman, and J. A. Savageau Suspected Infant Abuse: Radiographic Skeletal Survey Practices in Pediatric Health Care Facilities Radiology, November 1, 2004; 233(2): 477 - 485. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. J. Lonergan, A. M. Baker, M. K. Morey, and S. C. Boos From the Archives of the AFIP: Child Abuse: Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation RadioGraphics, July 1, 2003; 23(4): 811 - 845. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A M Kemp, N Stoodley, C Cobley, L Coles, K W Kemp, and J F Geddes Apnoea and brain swelling in non-accidental head injury * COMMENTARY Arch. Dis. Child., June 1, 2003; 88(6): 472 - 476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S A Mandelstam, D Cook, M Fitzgerald, M R Ditchfield, and H Carty Complementary use of radiological skeletal survey and bone scintigraphy in detection of bony injuries in suspected child abuse * COMMENTARY Arch. Dis. Child., May 1, 2003; 88(5): 387 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. L. Lukefahr, C. A. Angel, E. P. Hendrick, and S. W. Torn Child Abuse by Percutaneous Insertion of Sewing Needles Clinical Pediatrics, August 1, 2001; 40(8): 461 - 463. [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect Shaken Baby Syndrome: Rotational Cranial Injuries{---}Technical Report Pediatrics, July 1, 2001; 108(1): 206 - 210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | E-MAIL ALERTS | SEARCH |
