Purpose: To assess the semiology, effectiveness and role of the modern diagnostic methods used to study diaphragmatic injuries.
Materials and methods: We report our personal experience acquired in the last 4 years in 23 patients. Eighteen patients had blunt and 6 penetrating diaphragmatic trauma, 10 of them involving the right and 14 the left hemidiaphragm. Plain chest X-rays were performed in 19 cases, gastrointestinal (GI) barium studies in 2, US in 5 and CT in 21 cases.
Results: Plain chest films were normal in one case (5%), not specific in 6 (32%), suggestive in 7 (37%), and diagnostic in 5 (26%). Barium studies of the GI tract were diagnostic in both patients (100%). US was suggestive in one case (20%) and diagnostic in 4 (80%). CT was not specific in 4 cases (19%), suggestive in 8 (38%) and diagnostic in 9 (43%).
Conclusions: Plain chest radiography remains the method of choice in the study of diaphragmatic injuries. US, in our still limited experience, seems to be the most accurate method in the direct demonstration of muscular traumas and should be performed more often in the study of diaphragmatic injuries. CT has poorer accuracy and, above all, shows only indirect signs, but it is fairly effective and plays a key role in the depiction of chest and abdominal traumas. Barium studies should be reserved, possibly, to the direct identification of digestive hernias, especially in the late phase.