The Mediastinum—Is It Wide? Emerg Med J: First Published As 10.1136/Emj.18.3.183 on 1 May 2001
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Emerg Med J 2001;18:183–185 183 The mediastinum—Is it wide? Emerg Med J: first published as 10.1136/emj.18.3.183 on 1 May 2001. Downloaded from C E Gleeson, R L Spedding, L A Harding, M Caplan Abstract Objective—To determine if the 8 cm upper limit for mediastinal width applies in the trauma setting of today. To define the upper limit of normal mediastinal width for supine chest films. Methods—A retrospective review of chest computed tomography scans was con- ducted to determine the width and posi- tion of the mediastinum within the supine chest. Radiographs were performed using a model that enabled the degree of mediastinal magnification to be ascer- tained in a variety of clinical settings. Figure 1 CT scan of the chest at the level of the aortic Results—The mean mediastinal width is arch. 6.31 cm. With standard radiographical techniques this mediastinum is magnified where pathology distorted the mediastinum to 8.93–10.07 cm. With minor adaptations were excluded. The remaining scans were then in radiographical technique this can be examined at the level of the maximum reduced to 7.31–7.92 cm. diameter of the aortic arch to determine: Conclusion—The 8 cm upper limit for (1) The composition and transverse diameter normal mediastinal width, set in the 1970s of the mediastinum at this level. does not apply in the modern trauma (2) The maximum width of the aortic arch. room. Changes in the position of the x ray (3) The distance from the anterior surface of cassette, and lengthening of the distance the aortic arch to the skin of the posterior between the patient and the x ray source chest wall. (The position to which the aor- will significantly reduce magnification. A tic arch gravitates in the supine chest). new range of upper limits is defined for The images were obtained on an Elscint the radiographical techniques possible in Twin II Helical scanner and stored on optical diVerent trauma settings. disk. The measurements were taken directly (Emerg Med J 2001;18:183–185) from the screen using an electronic cursor (fig http://emj.bmj.com/ 1). Two perpendicular lines from the edges of Keywords: mediastinum; radiography the object enabled measurement to be con- firmed at two points. At the completion of the series, accuracy was confirmed by re- Evaluation of mediastinal width on a supine measuring every fifth scan. chest film is now a standard part of the initial Having obtained these figures, we were able assessment of the trauma patient.1–3 In some to look at magnification in various simulated cases of mediastinal widening, it is clear that clinical settings. on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. the mechanism of injury and the condition of Magnification is dependent on the: the patient should lead to further investigation. (1) Focus to film distance (FFD). The distance This may include contrast computed tomogra- from the x ray source (focus) to the x ray film phy (CT), transoesophageal echocardiography (fig 2). and definitive arch aortography.4–6 Interpret- (2) Object to film distance (OFD). The ation is a diagnostic challenge when the medi- distance between the object—that is, the astinum appears wide, the patient is well and mediastinum—and the x ray film (fig 2). the mechanism of injury is unlikely to have As FFD is increased, the x ray beams caused a traumatic rupture of the thoracic become more parallel and magnification is aorta. minimised. If OFD is increased, divergence of Studies in the 1970s suggested an upper the x ray beams produces greater magnification limit for mediastinal width of 8 cm–8.8 cm.78 of the object—that is, the mediastinum. Since then trauma management has changed Using wood, sponge and a commercially and therefore radiographic techniques have Accident and available x ray measuring tool, we assembled a Emergency, had to adapt. model. This enabled us to change the compo- Warrington Hospital It is our intention to discover whether these nents of the OFD. The following factors were NHS Trust, historical upper limits still apply and if not, to studied: Warrington define new upper limits. (1) Equipment variables—the depth of the Correspondence to: long spinal board, the depth of the Dr Gleeson, Methods mattress and the distance to the trolley’s x 25 The Village Gate, To ascertain the width of the normal mediasti- ray tray. Dalkey, Co Dublin, Ireland num and its position within the supine chest, (2) Patient variables—mediastinal depth and Accepted for publication we conducted an 18 month retrospective patient weight. Volunteers with weights 19 June 2000 review of chest CT scans of white adults. Scans varying from 50–90 kg lay supine on a long www.emjonline.com 184 Gleeson, Spedding, Harding, et al Typical Optimal Trauma short 100 cm FFD/short OFD long 180 cm FFD/short OFD shorter FFD/longer OFD Emerg Med J: first published as 10.1136/emj.18.3.183 on 1 May 2001. Downloaded from x-ray focus Divergent x-ray Spinal board beams Mediastinium x-ray cassette Wider mediastinal Wide mediastinal beneath trolley Parallel x-ray image image x-ray cassette beams Mattress Accurate mediastinal image Figure 2 How changing the FFD and OFD influences magnification. Table 1 Components of the mediastinum average aortic diameter was 4.6 cm (SD 0.95). However, the mean mediastinal width was 6.31 Aorta and: SVC 197 cm (SD 0.97). SVC and brachiocephalic 63 The anterior surface of the aorta was SVC and brachiocephalic and innominate 5 situated at a mean of 15.89 cm (SD 1.69) from Brachiocephalic 10 Three or more vessels 7 the skin of the posterior chest wall. The average Total 282 chest diameter was 21.06 cm (SD 2.47). The average long spinal board depth was 4.5 spine board. The resultant compression of cm. The distance between the spinal board and the mattress, beneath the board, was the x ray cassette tray beneath six types of measured to accurately calculate the eVect commercially available trolley varied between on OFD. 7.1–12.9 cm. Once the above were quantified radiographs Table 2 shows how the average 6.31 cm were taken using FFDs of 100, 140, and 180 mediastinum is magnified. In the 1970s supine cm. chest radiographs were exposed with 100 cm http://emj.bmj.com/ We then looked at the eVect these variables FFD and the x ray cassette directly beneath the had on the magnification of a range of medias- patient. This resulted in the mean mediasti- tinal widths. The geometry was then verified num being magnified to 7.5 cm. Using the against the verified formula for magnification.9 same FFD of 100 cm, with the longer OFD commonly used in the modern trauma setting, Magnification = FFD/FFD−OFD. the average mediastinum is magnified to 9.48 cm. Results However, by lengthening the FFD to 140 cm In the 18 month study period, 343 chest CT this can be improved to 8.29 cm. Further on September 27, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. scans were reviewed. Altogether 282 (82%) improvement can be achieved by placing the x were suitable for inclusion in the study.The ray cassette beneath the spinal board—that is, other 61 scans were excluded because of shortening the OFD. The resultant mediastinal pathology in the chest or the abdomen distort- image is narrowed to 7.38 cm. ing the mediastinum. Data were analysed on a Table 3 shows the upper ranges of mediasti- SPSS package. nal widths. This range of new upper limits is At the level of the aortic knuckle, the dependent upon the FFD and the diVering mediastinum contained the aorta and the other positions for the x ray cassettes. Using the great vessels (table 1). In all cases, the superior standard used today of 100 cm FFD and long vena cava (SVC) contributed to the mediasti- OFD, the new upper limit for normal medias- nal width. The biggest contribution was when tinal width in 95% of the population is 12.4 the SVC lay beside the aorta. cm. By improving radiographic technique, with The values for the mediastinal and aortic a 140 cm FFD and the x ray cassette under the diameters were normally distributed. The Table 3 Magnification of the mediastinum 1 and 2 SD Table 2 Magnification of the average mediastinum (6.31 cm) in various clinical settings above the mean* x ray cassette placement x ray cassette placement Beneath spinal Beneath shallow Beneath Beneath Beneath Beneath deep FFD (cm) Beneath patient board trolley Beneath deep trolley FFD (cm) patient spinal board shallow trolley trolley 100 7.5 (7.17–7.89)* 7.95 (7.56–8.33) 8.7 (8.26–9.21) 9.48 (8.93–10.07) 100 8.67,9.83 9.18,10.40 10.05,11.39 10.94,12.40 140 7.12 (6.9–7.36) 7.38 (7.31–7.92) 7.86 (7.6–8.15) 8.29 (7.99–8.61) 140 8.22,9.32 8.54,9.68 9.08,10.29 9.56,10.84 180 6.92 (6.76–7.10) 7.45 (7.25–7.65) 7.45 (7.25–7.65) 7.75 (7.54–7.96) 180 8.0,9.07 8.67,9.32 8.60,9.75 8.94,10.14 *Range relates to chest depth. *Mediastinum located at the average AP depth within the chest. www.emjonline.com The mediastinum 185 spinal board the upper limit is a more FFD and long OFD (table 3).