@article{MAKHILLRJMS202519431753,
    title = {Comparitive Study of USG, CT and MRI in Assessment of Blunt Trauma Abdomen},
    journal = {Research Journal of Medical Sciences},
    volume = {19},
    number = {4},
    pages = {25-36},
    year = {2025},
    issn = {1815-9346},
    doi = {makrjms.2025.4.25.36},
    url = {https://makhillpublications.co/view-article.php?issn=1815-9346&doi=makrjms.2025.4.25.36},
    author = {Prahaladh and},
    keywords = {Blunt trauma, MRI, CT, USG},
    abstract = {Blunt abdominal trauma may represent an immediate threat to life and
requires rapid diagnosis and treatment. A diagnostic tool is required for
assessment of abdominal injuries since clinical examination and physical
examination is unreliable in most of the cases. The management of
patients with blunt abdominal injury has evolved greatly over the last few
decades. Major changes in the diagnostics of hemodynamically stable
patients with blunt trauma have occurred. Major changes in the
diagnostics of hemodynamically stable patients with blunt trauma have
occurred. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with the lack of radiation
exposure and iodinated contrast material, is an attractive option for
diagnosis in stable patient. To compare the diagnostic efficacy of USG, CT
and MRI of Abdomen in Blunt Abdominal Trauma in order to bring out the
most effective diagnostic modality. The patients, satisfying the inclusion
criteria, after clinical evaluation, were subjected to Abdominal X‐ray,
Ultrasonography, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance
Imaging and a report was obtained from the radiologist regarding the
pathology associated. This was compared with the intra‐operative finding
during Exploratory Laparotomy Procedure. The data was collected in a
pretested Case Record Proforma designed for the study and was assessed
by appropriate statistical methods. Sensitivity, specificity, positive
predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of USG was
determined to be 73.68%, 96.43%, 96.55%, 72.97% and 83.33%
respectively. In CT and MRI sensitivity was 85.53% and 96.05%, specificity
was 96.43% and 98.21%, PPV was 97.01% and 98.65%, NPV was
83.08% and 94.83% and accuracy was 90.15% and 96.97% respectively.
Higher sensitivity and specificity along with greater accuracy was noted
in MRI as compared to CT and USG.}
    }