To report our experience with computed tomography (CT) scans to detect traumatic arthrotomies of the knee (TAK) joint based on the presence of intra-articular air.

Retrospective review.

Level I trauma center.

Sixty-two consecutive patients (63 knees) underwent a CT scan of the knee in the emergency department and had a minimum of 14 days follow-up. Cohort of 37 patients (37 knees) from the original 62 patients who underwent a saline load test (SLT).

CT scan and SLT.

Positive traumatic arthrotomy of the knee (+TAK) was defined as operating room (OR) confirmation of an arthrotomy or no intra-articular air on CT scan (-iaCT) (and -SLT if performed) with follow-up revealing a septic knee. Periarticular wound equivalent to no traumatic arthrotomy (pw = (-TAK)) was defined as OR evaluation revealing no arthrotomy or -iaCT (and -SLT if performed) with follow-up revealing no septic knee.

All 32 knees with intra-articular air on CT scan (+iaCT) had OR confirmation of a TAK and none of these patients had a knee infection at a mean follow-up of 140.0 ± 279.6 days. None of the 31 patients with -iaCT had a knee infection at a mean follow-up of 291.0 ± 548.1 days. Based on these results, the sensitivity and specificity of the CT scan to detect +TAK and pw = (-TAK) was 100%. In a subgroup of 37 patients that received both a CT scan and the conventional SLT, the sensitivity and specificity of the CT scan was 100% compared with 92% for the SLT (P < 0.001).

CT scan performs better than the conventional SLT to detect traumatic knee arthrotomies and identify periarticular knee wounds that do not require surgical intervention and should be considered a valid diagnostic test in the appropriate clinical setting.

Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Polls results

On a scale of 1 to 10, rate how much this article will change your clinical practice?

NO change
BIG change
82% Article relates to my practice (92/111)
8% Article does not relate to my practice (9/111)
9% Undecided (10/111)

Will this article lead to more cost-effective healthcare?

63% Yes (71/112)
25% No (28/112)
11% Undecided (13/112)

Was this article biased? (commercial or personal)

6% Yes (7/112)
89% No (100/112)
4% Undecided (5/112)

What level of evidence do you think this article is?

3% Level 1 (4/111)
13% Level 2 (15/111)
78% Level 3 (87/111)
4% Level 4 (5/111)
0% Level 5 (0/111)