Case 37: Forearm Fracture

Teini Elisara

Case

An 82 year old female with a past medical history of anemia of chronic disease, breast cancer, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, osteoporosis, rectal adenocarcinoma, scleroderma with pulmonary involvement, and systemic lupus erythematosus presented to the emergency department after a mechanical fall the night prior. Patient reported that she was getting into bed when she tripped and fell on the left side of her body landing on her left arm and hit in the side of her head on the floor. Patient endorsed severe pain to her left wrist. She was able to move her fingers; however had severe pain doing so. In addition, unable to supinate due to severe pain. Sensation was intact throughout the hand and wrist.

Vitals: BP 162/64 | Pulse 67 | Temp 98 °F (36.7 °C) | Resp 16 | Wt 53 kg (116 lb 13.5 oz) | SpO2 98% | BMI 22.08 kg/m²

On physical exam of the left wrist, there was significant swelling and overlying bruising. Wrist did not appear grossly displaced laterally or medially. Decreased range of motion secondary to pain; sensation intact and able to move digits. There were no open wounds.

A bedside ultrasound was performed on the patient’s distal forearm, the following images were obtained:

Figure 1: Left distal ulna

Figure 2: Left distal radius

Discussion

In this case, we identified fractures in both the distal radius and ulnar styloid of our patient. The joint capsule was visualized and negative for signs of effusion. We visualized the joint capsule by identifying Lister’s tubercle, the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon and extensor carpi radialis longus. We then rotated the transducer into a longitudinal plane and looked for signs of anechoic fluid between the distal radius and scaphoid bone.

The right wrist also scanned for anatomy comparison. We were able to identify fractures quickly and with minimal discomfort to the patient. Left distal radius and ulnar styloid fractures were confirmed by two-plane x-ray.

Cortical fractures are a common presentation to the emergency department, with distal forearm fractures being amongst the most common in both adult and pediatric populations. Wrist fracture prevalence in the United States is 12% in adults over the age of 50, with significant increases over the last 20 years [1,2]. As x-ray is the gold standard for diagnosing fractures, ultrasound is not typically thought of as an option for identification. However, it is a possible alternative for fracture identification in the emergency department, with high specificity and sensitivity [3]. In addition, ultrasound can be used to assess the healing phases of fracture using grayscale and color doppler [4]. With increased prevalence and use of ultrasound, it is a reasonable alternative for patients where reduction of exposure to ionizing radiation is preferred, such as pediatrics or pregnant peoples. It also may provide benefit for those with significant pain, when further MSK or vasculature evaluation is needed, or when x-ray is not easily accessible.

References

  1. Ye J, Li Q, Nie J. Prevalence, Characteristics, and Associated Risk Factors of Wrist Fractures in Americans Above 50: The Cross-Sectional NHANES Study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022 Apr 25;13:800129. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2022.800129. PMID: 35547001; PMCID: PMC9082306.
  2. Xu B, Radojčić MR, Anderson DB, Shi B, Yao L, Chen Y, Feng S, Lee JH, Chen L. Trends in prevalence of fractures among adults in the United States, 1999-2020: a population-based study. Int J Surg. 2024 Feb 1;110(2):721-732. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000883. PMID: 37921645; PMCID:PMC10871608.
  3. Douma-den Hamer D, Blanker MH, Edens MA, Buijteweg LN, Boomsma MF, van Helden SH, Mauritz GJ. Ultrasound for Distal Forearm Fracture: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2016 May 19;11(5):e0155659. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155659. PMID: 27196439; PMCID: PMC4873261.
  4. Cocco G, Ricci V, Villani M, Delli Pizzi A, Izzi J, Mastandrea M, Boccatonda A, Naňka O, Corvino A, Caulo M, Vecchiet J. Ultrasound imaging of bone fractures. Insights Imaging. 2022 Dec 13;13(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s13244-022-01335-z. PMID: 36512142; PMCID: PMC9748005.

Caudal Edge of the Liver in the Right Upper Quadrant (RUQ) View Is the Most Sensitive Area for Free Fluid on the FAST Exam

ruq free fluid

Background

The FAST exam is a useful tool in screening for the presence of intraperitoneal free fluid in the setting of trauma. The utilization of ultrasound provides rapid imaging in the trauma bay that can help guide clinical decision making and the necessity for surgical intervention. The FAST exam is comprised of subxiphoid, right upper quadrant, left upper quadrant, and suprapubic views by ultrasound. Previous research has indicated that the RUQ, specifically the hepato-renal space (Morrison’s pouch), is the preferred area for the detection of free fluid.1,2 However, scarce research into the sub-divisions of each view has been performed.

Caudal Edge of the Liver in the Right Upper Quadrant (RUQ) View Is the Most Sensitive Area for Free Fluid on the FAST Exam






The Bottom Line 

Despite previous emphasis on Morrison’s pouch, the caudal liver tip is a more sensitive indicator of intraperitoneal free fluid and should be properly visualized on every FAST exam.

Case # 13: What Lies Beneath

A 30 year old male presents to the emergency department after blunt trauma to the face from an altercation. He notes he was punched several times in the face but did not pass out. His exam is notable for significant right periorbital ecchymosis and edema with inability to open his eye. You are unable to perform a direct eye exam given the significant periorbital swelling.  A CT maxillofacial is performed which shows an isolated right inferior orbital wall fracture.

Vitals: T 98.6 HR 85 BP 142/81  RR 14 O2 98% on RA

Prior to ENT consultation, a bedside ultrasound of the orbits is performed.  In spite of being unable to open the eye, what can you tell your consultant regarding your exam?

ezgif.com-resize

ezgif.com-resize (1)

Comparison of Four Views to Single-View Ultrasound Protocols to Identify Clinically Significant Pneumothorax

Background

Ultrasound has become a key adjunct for the initial evaluation of trauma patients in the emergency department (ED), with the eFAST, or extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma examination, including lung evaluation for the presence of a pneumothorax (PTX) or hemothorax. While prior research has shown ultrasound (US) to be very effective at identifying a PTX [1], there is no standardized imaging protocol that has been shown be superior to others. The two most common approaches are a single view of each hemithorax and four views of each hemithorax [2] —this paper sets out to determine if the single view strategy is sufficient to identify a clinically significant PTX.

Comparison of Four Views to Single-view Ultrasound Protocols to Identify Clinically Significant Pneumothorax

 

The Bottom Line

A single anterior view on each side of the chest in a supine patient is sufficient to detect clinically significant pneumothoraces.

Does This Adult Patient Have a Blunt Intra-abdominal Injury?

Background

Trauma is the leading cause of death in those younger than 45 years in the United States. Around 80% of injuries are due to blunt trauma with 20% involving penetrating trauma. It is blunt trauma, however, that carries substantial diagnostic challenges due to complex injury patterns and difficult management strategies. This paper sets out to review and summarize the comparisons of different techniques in diagnosis of intra-abdominal injury via physical exam findings, laboratory values, and imaging including bedside ultrasound. 

Does This Adult Patient Have a Blunt Intra-abdominal Injury? 

The Bottom Line

Bedside ultrasonography is a highly specific diagnostic tool to rule in  intra-abdominal injury following blunt trauma but should be used in conjunction with clinical gestalt, physical exam findings and laboratory values when ruling out injury.

FAST Ultrasound Examination as a Predictor of Outcomes After Resuscitative Thoracotomy

Background

The emergency resuscitative thoracotomy (RT), aka The ED Thoracotomy, is a procedure performed as a last-ditch effort during resuscitation of a patient in traumatic arrest or impending traumatic arrest. Unfortunately despite physicians’ best efforts, outcomes for this procedure are generally poor. The largest review of outcomes after RT performed in the emergency department found an overall survival of 7.4% (8.8% for penetrating injury, 1.4% for blunt injury), with good neurological outcomes present in 92.4% of surviving patients [2]. Furthermore, given the lack of high quality evidence on this procedure, there are no universal guidelines that exist to determine optimal candidates [3,4]. Point-of-care ultrasound has become a core adjunct in evaluation of the trauma patient, however there is minimal data evaluating its utility in determining which trauma patients may benefit from RT [5].

FAST Ultrasound Examination as a Predictor of Outcomes After Resuscitative Thoracotomy: A Prospective Evaluation

The Bottom Line

The FAST exam is a critical adjunct in traumatic patients and should be applied to all cases of traumatic arrest in order to determine the utility of performing an emergency RT.

Translate »