The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries
Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All pa...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Schellenberg, Morgan [verfasserin verfasserIn] Inaba, Kenji [verfasserin verfasserIn] Heindel, Patrick [verfasserin verfasserIn] Forestiere, Matthew J. [verfasserin verfasserIn] Clark, Damon [verfasserin verfasserIn] Matsushima, Kazuhide [verfasserin verfasserIn] Lam, Lydia [verfasserin verfasserIn] Demetriades, Demetrios [verfasserin verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2019 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: European journal of trauma and emergency surgery - Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007, 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:46 ; year:2019 ; number:6 ; day:10 ; month:06 ; pages:1351-1356 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR042163552 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR042163552 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230520012331.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 201127s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR042163552 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
084 | |a 44.80 |2 bkl | ||
084 | |a 44.65 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Schellenberg, Morgan |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 4 | |a The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
264 | 1 | |c 2019 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Shotgun wound |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Shotgun injury |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Gunshot wound |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Trauma |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Selective nonoperative management |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Inaba, Kenji |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Heindel, Patrick |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Forestiere, Matthew J. |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Clark, Damon |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Matsushima, Kazuhide |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Lam, Lydia |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Demetriades, Demetrios |e verfasserin verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |d Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 |g 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 |w (DE-627)527573574 |w (DE-600)2276432-X |x 1863-9941 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:46 |g year:2019 |g number:6 |g day:10 |g month:06 |g pages:1351-1356 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_267 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2070 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2116 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2119 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.80 |q ASE |
936 | b | k | |a 44.65 |q ASE |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 46 |j 2019 |e 6 |b 10 |c 06 |h 1351-1356 |
author_variant |
m s ms k i ki p h ph m j f mj mjf d c dc k m km l l ll d d dd |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:18639941:2019----::hdansidlmafht |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2019 |
bklnumber |
44.80 44.65 |
publishDate |
2019 |
allfields |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 doi (DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl Schellenberg, Morgan verfasserin verfasserin aut The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 Inaba, Kenji verfasserin verfasserin aut Heindel, Patrick verfasserin verfasserin aut Forestiere, Matthew J. verfasserin verfasserin aut Clark, Damon verfasserin verfasserin aut Matsushima, Kazuhide verfasserin verfasserin aut Lam, Lydia verfasserin verfasserin aut Demetriades, Demetrios verfasserin verfasserin aut Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 (DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X 1863-9941 nnns volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.80 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 46 2019 6 10 06 1351-1356 |
spelling |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 doi (DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl Schellenberg, Morgan verfasserin verfasserin aut The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 Inaba, Kenji verfasserin verfasserin aut Heindel, Patrick verfasserin verfasserin aut Forestiere, Matthew J. verfasserin verfasserin aut Clark, Damon verfasserin verfasserin aut Matsushima, Kazuhide verfasserin verfasserin aut Lam, Lydia verfasserin verfasserin aut Demetriades, Demetrios verfasserin verfasserin aut Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 (DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X 1863-9941 nnns volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.80 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 46 2019 6 10 06 1351-1356 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 doi (DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl Schellenberg, Morgan verfasserin verfasserin aut The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 Inaba, Kenji verfasserin verfasserin aut Heindel, Patrick verfasserin verfasserin aut Forestiere, Matthew J. verfasserin verfasserin aut Clark, Damon verfasserin verfasserin aut Matsushima, Kazuhide verfasserin verfasserin aut Lam, Lydia verfasserin verfasserin aut Demetriades, Demetrios verfasserin verfasserin aut Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 (DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X 1863-9941 nnns volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.80 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 46 2019 6 10 06 1351-1356 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 doi (DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl Schellenberg, Morgan verfasserin verfasserin aut The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 Inaba, Kenji verfasserin verfasserin aut Heindel, Patrick verfasserin verfasserin aut Forestiere, Matthew J. verfasserin verfasserin aut Clark, Damon verfasserin verfasserin aut Matsushima, Kazuhide verfasserin verfasserin aut Lam, Lydia verfasserin verfasserin aut Demetriades, Demetrios verfasserin verfasserin aut Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 (DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X 1863-9941 nnns volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.80 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 46 2019 6 10 06 1351-1356 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 doi (DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl Schellenberg, Morgan verfasserin verfasserin aut The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 Inaba, Kenji verfasserin verfasserin aut Heindel, Patrick verfasserin verfasserin aut Forestiere, Matthew J. verfasserin verfasserin aut Clark, Damon verfasserin verfasserin aut Matsushima, Kazuhide verfasserin verfasserin aut Lam, Lydia verfasserin verfasserin aut Demetriades, Demetrios verfasserin verfasserin aut Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 (DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X 1863-9941 nnns volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.80 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 46 2019 6 10 06 1351-1356 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery 46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356 volume:46 year:2019 number:6 day:10 month:06 pages:1351-1356 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Shotgun wound Shotgun injury Gunshot wound Trauma Selective nonoperative management |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Schellenberg, Morgan @@aut@@ Inaba, Kenji @@aut@@ Heindel, Patrick @@aut@@ Forestiere, Matthew J. @@aut@@ Clark, Damon @@aut@@ Matsushima, Kazuhide @@aut@@ Lam, Lydia @@aut@@ Demetriades, Demetrios @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2019-06-10T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
527573574 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
SPR042163552 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR042163552</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520012331.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201127s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR042163552</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.80</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schellenberg, Morgan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shotgun wound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shotgun injury</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gunshot wound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Trauma</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Selective nonoperative management</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Inaba, Kenji</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Heindel, Patrick</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forestiere, Matthew J.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clark, Damon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Matsushima, Kazuhide</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lam, Lydia</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Demetriades, Demetrios</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European journal of trauma and emergency surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007</subfield><subfield code="g">46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)527573574</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2276432-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1863-9941</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:46</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:10</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1351-1356</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.80</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">46</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">10</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">1351-1356</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Schellenberg, Morgan |
spellingShingle |
Schellenberg, Morgan ddc 610 bkl 44.80 bkl 44.65 misc Shotgun wound misc Shotgun injury misc Gunshot wound misc Trauma misc Selective nonoperative management The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
authorStr |
Schellenberg, Morgan |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)527573574 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1863-9941 |
topic_title |
610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries Shotgun wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Shotgun injury (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gunshot wound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trauma (dpeaa)DE-He213 Selective nonoperative management (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.80 bkl 44.65 misc Shotgun wound misc Shotgun injury misc Gunshot wound misc Trauma misc Selective nonoperative management |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.80 bkl 44.65 misc Shotgun wound misc Shotgun injury misc Gunshot wound misc Trauma misc Selective nonoperative management |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.80 bkl 44.65 misc Shotgun wound misc Shotgun injury misc Gunshot wound misc Trauma misc Selective nonoperative management |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |
hierarchy_parent_id |
527573574 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)527573574 (DE-600)2276432-X |
title |
The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR042163552 (SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e |
title_full |
The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
author_sort |
Schellenberg, Morgan |
journal |
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |
journalStr |
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2019 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
container_start_page |
1351 |
author_browse |
Schellenberg, Morgan Inaba, Kenji Heindel, Patrick Forestiere, Matthew J. Clark, Damon Matsushima, Kazuhide Lam, Lydia Demetriades, Demetrios |
container_volume |
46 |
class |
610 ASE 44.80 bkl 44.65 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Schellenberg, Morgan |
doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin verfasserin |
title_sort |
diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
title_auth |
The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
abstract |
Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. |
abstractGer |
Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_267 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2070 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2116 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
6 |
title_short |
The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Inaba, Kenji Heindel, Patrick Forestiere, Matthew J. Clark, Damon Matsushima, Kazuhide Lam, Lydia Demetriades, Demetrios |
author2Str |
Inaba, Kenji Heindel, Patrick Forestiere, Matthew J. Clark, Damon Matsushima, Kazuhide Lam, Lydia Demetriades, Demetrios |
ppnlink |
527573574 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4 |
up_date |
2024-07-04T01:05:47.880Z |
_version_ |
1803608546748661760 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR042163552</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520012331.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201127s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR042163552</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00068-019-01168-4-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.80</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schellenberg, Morgan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The diagnostic dilemma of shotgun injuries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose Shotgun wounds pose diagnostic challenges due to variable fragment penetration and degradation of CT images. This study compared epidemiology and outcomes between shotgun wounds and gunshot wounds (GSWs), and defined the diagnostic capabilities of CT scan after shotgun wounds. Methods All patients presenting to our Level I trauma center after ballistic injury (01/2008–03/2017) were included. Study groups were defined by shotgun vs GSW. Demographics, clinical data, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. The diagnostic yield of CT scan after shotgun wounds was calculated. Results Of 3177 patients, 3126 (98%) were injured by GSWs and 51 (2%) by shotguns. Of the shotgun-injured patients, 5 (10%) had superficial wounds, 8 (16%) underwent emergency surgery, and 38 (74%) underwent CT scan [10 (26%) were then brought to OR and 28 (74%) were managed nonoperatively]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CT scan after shotgun wounds were 0.93, 0.96, 0.93, and 0.97. There was one false-negative CT scan, which missed a hollow viscus injury. There was one false-positive CT scan, which suggested a hollow viscus injury, although none was found on exploratory laparotomy. Patients injured by shotgun required fewer cavitary explorations (25% vs 59%, p = 0.006) but more soft tissue (21% vs 8%, p = 0.013) and extremity vascular surgeries (86% vs 9%, p < 0.001) than GSW-injured patients. Conclusions Shotgun injuries are far less frequent than GSWs but generally follow the same diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Clinicians must be aware of the pitfalls of CT scanning after shotgun injuries, which can be falsely positive or falsely negative. A high index of suspicion for injury and a period of observation after negative CT scan may, therefore, be prudent.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shotgun wound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Shotgun injury</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gunshot wound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Trauma</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Selective nonoperative management</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Inaba, Kenji</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Heindel, Patrick</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Forestiere, Matthew J.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clark, Damon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Matsushima, Kazuhide</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lam, Lydia</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Demetriades, Demetrios</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European journal of trauma and emergency surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg : Springer Medizin, 2007</subfield><subfield code="g">46(2019), 6 vom: 10. Juni, Seite 1351-1356</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)527573574</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2276432-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1863-9941</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:46</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:6</subfield><subfield code="g">day:10</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1351-1356</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-019-01168-4</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2070</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.80</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">46</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">6</subfield><subfield code="b">10</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">1351-1356</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.398429 |