Outcomes of Incidental Lung Nodules With Structured Recommendations and Electronic Tracking

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of structured recommendations on follow-up completion for incidental lung nodules (ILNs).MethodsPatients with ILNs before and after implementation of structured Fleischner recommendations and electronic tracking were sampled randomly. The cohorts were compared for imaging follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess appropriate follow-up and loss to follow-up, with independent variables including use of structured recommendations or tracking, age, sex, race, ethnicity, setting of the index test (inpatient, outpatient, emergency department), smoking history, and nodule features.ResultsIn all, 1,301 patients met final inclusion criteria, including 255 patients before and 1,046 patients after structured recommendations or tracking. Baseline differences were found in the pre- and postintervention groups, with smaller ILNs and younger age after implementing structured recommendations. Comparing pre- versus postintervention outcomes, 40.0% (100 of 250) versus 29.5% (309 of 1,046) of patients had no follow-up despite Fleischner indications for imaging (P = .002), and among the remaining patients, 56.6% (82 of 145) versus 75.0% (553 of 737) followed up on time (P < .001). Delayed follow-up was more frequent before intervention. Differences postintervention were mostly accounted for by nodules ≤8 mm in the outpatient setting (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, younger age, White race, outpatient setting, and larger nodule size showed significant association with appropriate follow-up completion (P < .015), but structured recommendations did not. Similar results applied for loss to follow-up.DiscussionConsistent use of structured reporting is likely key to mitigate selection bias when benchmarking rates of appropriate follow-up of ILN. Emergency department patients and inpatients are at high risk of missed or delayed follow-up despite structured recommendations.     

Natural Language Processing for Identification of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules in Radiology Reports

PurposeTo develop natural language processing (NLP) to identify incidental lung nodules (ILNs) in radiology reports for assessment of management recommendations.Methods and MaterialsWe searched the electronic health records for patients who underwent chest CT during 2014 and 2017, before and after implementation of a department-wide dictation macro of the Fleischner Society recommendations. We randomly selected 950 unstructured chest CT reports and reviewed manually for ILNs. An NLP tool was trained and validated against the manually reviewed set, for the task of automated detection of ILNs with exclusion of previously known or definitively benign nodules. For ILNs found in the training and validation sets, we assessed whether reported management recommendations agreed with Fleischner Society guidelines. The guideline concordance of management recommendations was compared between 2014 and 2017.ResultsThe NLP tool identified ILNs with sensitivity and specificity of 91.1% and 82.2%, respectively, in the validation set. Positive and negative predictive values were 59.7% and 97.0%. In reports of ILNs in the training and validation sets before versus after introduction of a Fleischner reporting macro, there was no difference in the proportion of reports with ILNs (108 of 500 [21.6%] versus 101 of 450 [22.4%]; P = .8), or in the proportion of reports with ILNs containing follow-up recommendations (75 of 108 [69.4%] versus 80 of 101 [79.2%]; P = .2]. Rates of recommendation guideline concordance were not significantly different before and after implementation of the standardized macro (52 of 75 [69.3%] versus 60 of 80 [75.0%]; P = .43).ConclusionNLP reliably automates identification of ILNs in unstructured reports, pertinent to quality improvement efforts for ILN management.     

Novel Quality Measure Set: Closing the Completion Loop on Radiology Follow-up Recommendations for Noncritical Actionable Incidental Findings

BackgroundCare gaps occur when radiology follow-up recommendations are poorly communicated or not completed, resulting in missed or delayed diagnosis potentially leading to worse patient outcomes. This ACR-led initiative assembled a technical expert panel (TEP) to advise development of quality measures intended to improve communication and drive increased completion rates for radiology follow-up recommendations.Materials and methodsA multistakeholder TEP was assembled to advise the development of quality measures. The project scope, limited to noncritical actionable incidental findings (AIFs), encourages practices to develop and implement systems ensuring appropriate communication and follow-up to completion.ResultsA suite of nine measures were developed: four outcome measures include closing the loop on completion of radiology follow-up recommendations for nonemergent AIFs (with pulmonary nodule and abdominal aortic aneurysm use cases) and overall cancer diagnoses. Five process measures address communication and tracking of AIFs: inclusion of available evidence or guidelines informing the recommendation, communication of AIFs to the practice managing ongoing care, identifying when AIFs have been communicated to the patient, and employing tracking and reminder systems for AIFs.ConclusionThis ACR-led initiative developed a measure set intended to improve patient outcomes by ensuring that AIFs are appropriately communicated and followed up. The intent of these measures is to focus improvement on specific areas in which gaps in communication and AIF follow-up may occur, prompting systems to devote resources that will identify and implement solutions to improve patient care.     

Improvement in Follow-up Imaging With a Patient Tracking System and Computerized Registry for Lung Nodule Management

PurposeDespite established guidelines, radiologists’ recommendations and timely follow-up of incidental lung nodules remain variable. To improve follow-up of nodules, a system using standardized language (tracker phrases) recommending time-based follow-up in chest CT reports, coupled with a computerized registry, was created.Materials and MethodsData were obtained from the electronic health record and a facility-built electronic lung nodule registry. We evaluated two randomly selected patient cohorts with incidental nodules on chest CT reports: before intervention (September 2008 to March 2011) and after intervention (August 2011 to December 2016). Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare the cohorts for the main outcome of timely follow-up, defined as a subsequent report within 13 months of the initial report.ResultsIn all, 410 patients were included in the pretracker cohort versus 626 in the tracker cohort. Before system inception, 30% of CT reports lacked an explicit time-based recommendation for nodule follow-up. The proportion of patients with timely follow-up increased from 46% to 55%, and the proportion of those with no documented follow-up or follow-up beyond 24 months decreased from 48% to 31%. The likelihood of timely follow-up increased 41%, adjusted for high risk for lung cancer and age 65 years or older. After system inception, reports missing a tracker phrase for nodule recommendation averaged 6%, without significant interyear variation.ConclusionsStandardized language added to CT reports combined with a computerized registry designed to identify and track patients with incidental lung nodules was associated with improved likelihood of follow-up imaging.     

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Nodules Detected Incidentally or by Screening: A Survey of Radiologist Awareness,Agreement, and Adherence From the Watch the Spot Trial

PurposeThe aim of this study was to examine radiologists’ beliefs about existing guidelines for pulmonary nodule evaluation.MethodsA self-administered survey was developed to ascertain awareness of, agreement with, and adherence to published guidelines, including those from the Fleischner Society and the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS™). Surveys were distributed to 514 radiologists at 13 health care systems that are participating in a large, pragmatic trial of pulmonary nodule evaluation. Prespecified comparisons were made among groups defined by type of health system, years of experience, reader volume, and study arm.ResultsThe response rate was 26.3%. Respondents were most familiar with guidelines from Fleischner (94%) and Lung-RADS (71%). For both incidental and screening-detected nodules, self-reported adherence to preferred guidelines was very high (97% and 94%, respectively), and most respondents believed that the benefits of adherence outweigh the harms (81% and 74%, respectively). Underlying evidence was thought to be high in quality by 68% of respondents for screening-detected nodules and 41% for incidental nodules. Approximately 70% of respondents believed that the frequency of recommended follow-up was “just right” for both guidelines. Radiologists who practice in nonintegrated health care systems were more likely to believe that the evidence was high in quality (79.5% versus 57.1%) and that the benefits of adherence outweigh the harms (85.1% versus 67.5%). Low-volume readers had lower awareness and self-reported adherence than higher volume readers.ConclusionsRadiologists reported high levels of familiarity and agreement with and adherence to guidelines for pulmonary nodule evaluation, but many overestimated the quality of evidence in support of the recommendations.     

High Variability in Radiologists' Reporting Practices for Incidental Thyroid Nodules Detected on CT and MRI

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:There are no guidelines for reporting incidental thyroid nodules seen on CT and MR imaging. We evaluated radiologists'' current reporting practices for incidental thyroid nodules detected on these imaging modalities.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Radiologists were surveyed regarding their reporting practices by using 14 scenarios of incidental thyroid nodules differing in size, patient demographics, and clinical history. Scenarios were evaluated for the following: 1) radiologists'' most commonly selected response, and 2) the proportion of radiologists selecting that response (degree of agreement). These measures were used to determine how the patient scenario and characteristics of the radiologists affected variability in practice.RESULTS:One hundred fifty-three radiologists participated. In 8/14 scenarios, the most common response was to “recommend sonography.” For the other scenarios, the most common response was to “report in only body of report.” The overall mean agreement for the 14 scenarios was 53%, and agreement ranged from 36% to 75%. Smaller nodules had lower agreement: 43%–51% for 8-mm nodules compared with 64%–75% for 15-mm nodules. Agreement was poorest for the 10-mm nodule in a 60-year-old woman (36%) and for scenarios with additional history of lung cancer (39%) and multiple nodules (36%). There was no significant difference in reporting practices and agreement when radiologists were categorized by years of practice, practice type, and subspecialty (P > .55).CONCLUSIONS:The reporting practice for incidental thyroid nodules on CT or MR imaging is highly variable among radiologists, especially for patients with smaller nodules (≤10 mm) and patients with multiple nodules and a history of cancer. This variability highlights the need for practice guidelines.

Incidental thyroid nodules are seen in 16%–18% of CT and MR imaging studies that include the thyroid.^1,2 Although the prevalence of malignancy in incidental thyroid nodules (ITNs) is low and small thyroid cancers have an excellent prognosis, concern for missing malignancy may nevertheless lead to further evaluation for small nonspecific thyroid nodules. Initiating a work-up of an ITN seen on CT or MR imaging with diagnostic sonography can lead to further costly procedures, including fine-needle aspiration, follow-up sonography examinations, or even diagnostic thyroid lobectomy.The Society of Radiologists in Sonography and other societies have published recommendations for biopsy of nodules seen on sonography,³ but no medical organizations have specific published recommendations for the work-up of thyroid nodules seen on CT and MR imaging.⁴ The Society of Radiologists in Sonography recommendations cannot be simply extrapolated to CT- and MR imaging–detected nodules because the sonographic signs of microcalcifications and solid composition cannot be reliably appreciated on CT and MR imaging.⁵ Furthermore, CT and MR imaging allow a more comprehensive evaluation of neck nodes than is possible with the limited number of images captured during a thyroid sonography examination.Without technique-specific guidelines, the reporting of ITNs seen on CT and MR imaging is likely to be nonuniform and influenced by radiologists'' practice types or personal opinions. This variation leads to inconsistent practices and the potential for confusion among clinicians who receive the radiology reports. In a retrospective study, Yousem et al² found that 61% of ITNs seen on CT and MR imaging of the neck were not reported by the radiologist issuing the clinical report, and they proposed that either the nodule was not seen or it was regarded as unimportant. A prior survey on incidental findings queried radiologists about the ITN, but the survey was limited to 1 scenario and was sent only to academic body imaging radiologists.⁶The aim of this study was to survey radiologists'' self-described reporting practices of hypothetic scenarios of ITNs detected on CT and MR imaging. We hypothesized that reporting practices for ITNs are highly variable and may depend on the radiologist''s experience, practice type, and training.     

Society of Abdominal Radiology Disease Focused Panel Survey on Clinical Utilization of Incidental Pancreatic Cyst Management Recommendations and Template Reporting

ObjectiveTo assess current practice patterns with respect to protocols used for incidental pancreatic cyst follow-up, management guidelines, and template reporting.MethodsThe Society of Abdominal Radiology Disease Focused Panel on intraductal pancreatic neoplasms distributed an anonymous 14-question survey to its members in June 2018 that focused on current utilization of incidental pancreatic cyst guidelines, protocols, and template reporting.ResultsAmong the 1,390 email invitations, 323 responded, and 94.7% (306 of 323) completed all questions. Respondents were mainly radiologists (93.8%, 303 of 323) from academic institutions (74.7%, 227 of 304) in North America (93.7%, 286 of 305). Of respondents, 42.5% (136 of 320) preferred 2017 ACR recommendations, 17.8% (57 of 320) homegrown systems, 15.0% (48 of 320) Fukuoka guidelines, and 7.8% (25 of 320) American Gastroenterological Association guidelines. The majority (68.7%, 222 of 323) agreed or strongly agreed that developing a single international consensus recommendation for management was important, and most radiologists preferred to include them in reports (231 of 322, 71.7%); yet only half included recommendations in >75% of reports (161 of 321). MR cholangiopancreatography was the modality of choice for follow-up of <2.5 cm cysts. Intravenous contrast was routinely used by 69.7% (212 of 304). Standardized reporting templates were rarely used in practice (12.8% 39 of 306).ConclusionsNearly 7 of 10 radiologists desire a unified international consensus recommendation for management of incidental cystic pancreatic lesions; ACR 2017 recommendations are most commonly used, followed by homegrown systems and Fukuoka guidelines. The majority of radiologists routinely use MR cholangiopancreatography with intravenous contrast for follow-up of incidental cystic lesions, but template reporting is rarely used.     

Comparing Breast and Abdominal Subspecialists’ Follow-Up Recommendations for Incidental Liver Lesions on Breast MRI

PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare breast imaging subspecialists’ follow-up recommendations for incidental liver lesions (ILLs) on breast MRI with abdominal subspecialty radiologists’ opinions informed by best-practice recommendations.MethodsIn this retrospective study at an academic medical center, natural language processing identified reports with ILLs among 2,181 breast MRI studies completed in 2015. Electronic health record and radiology report reviews abstracted malignancy presence or absence, prior imaging, and breast subspecialists’ recommendations regarding ILLs for random sets of 30 patients: ILLs with follow-up recommendations, ILLs without recommendations, and without ILLs. Two abdominal radiologists evaluated MRI liver findings and offered follow-up recommendations in consensus. The primary outcome was agreement between breast and abdominal subspecialists in patients with ILL follow-up recommendations compared with those without (χ² analysis). Secondary outcomes were agreement between subspecialists when ILLs were reported and referring clinicians’ adherence to follow-up recommendations.ResultsILLs were identified in 11.3% of breast MRI reports (247 of 2,181); breast subspecialists made follow-up recommendations in 12% of them (30 of 247). Abdominal subspecialists agreed with breast subspecialists when ILLs required no follow-up (29 of 30 cases) but disagreed with 28 of 30 breast subspecialists’ follow-up recommendations (agreement proportion 29 of 30 versus 2 of 30, P < .0001). Subspecialists agreed in 93% of cases (28 of 30) when breast imagers reported no ILLs. Overall, 16 of 30 breast subspecialists’ follow-up recommendations were performed; ILLs were benign in 15.ConclusionsAbdominal subspecialists disagreed frequently with breast subspecialists regarding follow-up recommendations for ILLs on breast MRI. Abdominal subspecialty consultation or embedding liver imaging decision support in breast imaging reporting workflow may reduce unnecessary imaging and improve care. Improvement opportunities may exist in other cross-subspecialty interpretation workflows.     

Radiologist Variation in the Rates of Follow-up Imaging Recommendations Made for Pulmonary Nodules

ObjectiveDetermine whether differences exist in rates of follow-up recommendations made for pulmonary nodules after accounting for multiple patient and radiologist factors.MethodsThis Institutional Review Board–approved, retrospective study was performed at an urban academic quaternary care hospital. We analyzed 142,001 chest and abdominal CT reports from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018, from abdominal, thoracic, and emergency radiology subspecialty divisions. A previously validated natural language processing (NLP) tool identified 24,512 reports documenting pulmonary nodule(s), excluding reports NLP-positive for lung cancer. A second validated NLP tool identified reports with follow-up recommendations specifically for pulmonary nodules. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the likelihood of pulmonary nodule follow-up recommendation. Interradiologist variability was quantified within subspecialty divisions.ResultsNLP classified 4,939 of 24,512 (20.1%) reports as having a follow-up recommendation for pulmonary nodule. Male patients comprised 45.3% (11,097) of the patient cohort; average patient age was 61.4 years (±14.1 years). The majority of reports were from outpatient studies (62.7%, 15,376 of 24,512), were chest CTs (75.9%, 18,615 of 24,512), and were interpreted by thoracic radiologists (63.7%, 15,614 of 24,512). In multivariable analysis, studies for male patients (odds ratio [OR]: 0.9 [0.8-0.9]) and abdominal CTs (OR: 0.6 [0.6-0.7] compared with chest CT) were less likely to have a pulmonary nodule follow-up recommendation. Older patients had higher rates of follow-up recommendation (OR: 1.01 for each additional year). Division-level analysis showed up to 4.3-fold difference between radiologists in the probability of making a follow-up recommendation for a pulmonary nodule.DiscussionSignificant differences exist in the probability of making a follow-up recommendation for pulmonary nodules among radiologists within the same subspecialty division.     

Radiology Reports for Incidental Thyroid Nodules on CT and MRI: High Variability across Subspecialties

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Variability in radiologists'' reporting styles and recommendations for incidental thyroid nodules can lead to confusion among clinicians and may contribute to inconsistent patient care. Our aim was to describe reporting practices of radiologists for incidental thyroid nodules seen on CT and MR imaging and to determine factors that influence reporting styles.MATERIALS AND METHODS:This is a retrospective study of patients with incidental thyroid nodules reported on CT and MR imaging between January and December 2011, identified by text search for “thyroid nodule” in all CT and MR imaging reports. The studies included CT and MR imaging scans of the neck, spine, and chest. Radiology reports were divided into those that mentioned the incidental thyroid nodules only in the “Findings” section versus those that reported the incidental thyroid nodules in the “Impression” section as well, because this latter reporting style gives more emphasis to the finding. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify radiologist, patient, and nodule characteristics that influenced reporting styles.RESULTS:Three hundred seventy-five patients met the criterion of having incidental thyroid nodules. One hundred thirty-eight (37%) patients had incidental thyroid nodules reported in the “Impression” section. On multivariate analysis, only radiologists'' divisions and nodule size were associated with reporting in “Impression.” Chest radiologists and neuroradiologists were more likely to report incidental thyroid nodules in the “Impression” section than their abdominal imaging colleagues, and larger incidental thyroid nodules were more likely to be reported in “Impression” (P ≤ .03). Seventy-three percent of patients with incidental thyroid nodules of ≥20 mm were reported in the “Impression” section, but higher variability in reporting was seen for incidental thyroid nodules measuring 10–14 mm and 15–19 mm, which were reported in “Impression” for 61% and 50% of patients, respectively.CONCLUSIONS:Reporting practices for incidental thyroid nodules detected on CT and MR imaging are predominantly influenced by nodule size and the radiologist''s subspecialty. Reporting was highly variable for nodules measuring 10–19 mm; this finding can be partially attributed to different reporting styles among radiology subspecialty divisions. The variability demonstrated in this study further underscores the need to develop CT and MR imaging practice guidelines with the goal of standardizing reporting of incidental thyroid nodules and thereby potentially improving the consistency and quality of patient care.

Incidental thyroid nodules (ITNs) are a common radiologic finding, seen in 1 in 6 patients undergoing CT and MR imaging examinations of the neck.^1,2 Unlike nodules seen on sonography, there are no reliable signs of malignancy and no well-accepted guidelines for reporting ITNs detected on CT and MR imaging. Consequently, the current practice of reporting thyroid nodules on CT and MR imaging by radiologists is highly variable.³ Some radiologists may report all ITNs because there is a chance that an ITN could be malignant. Other radiologists may not report any ITNs because thyroid cancers in ITNs are relatively uncommon⁴ and small thyroid cancers often have an indolent course.^5,6 In particular, reporting an ITN in the “Impression” section of a radiology report provides more emphasis of the finding and may increase the chance of further work-up.Different recommendations for patients with the same nodule characteristics and clinical history are problematic because they can lead to variation in practice patterns, potential variation in the quality of patient care, and anxiety for patients, and they can potentially increase health care costs from the performance of more imaging studies, biopsies, and diagnostic surgeries.^2,7–9 Although some incidental cancers may be diagnosed and treated at an earlier stage, >50% of patients with ITNs that have surgery will ultimately be diagnosed with benign disease.^10,11The variation in reporting styles for ITNs seen on CT and MR imaging has been measured in a recent study, which surveyed radiologists on how they reported different scenarios varying in nodule size and patient history.³ The study demonstrated high variability of ITN reporting, with an overall mean agreement in reporting style of 53% and lower rates of agreement for smaller nodules. A limitation of a survey, however, is that it may not accurately reflect what a radiologist actually does in practice. Another study evaluated reporting practices for ITNs based on radiology reports for cervical spine CT.¹² The authors found that recommendations for ITNs are made inconsistently and the type of management recommended is variable. However, variability in reporting may have been underestimated in their study because it was limited to CT reports issued only by emergency radiologists and did not encompass the reporting practices of abdominal, chest, and neuroimaging radiologists. In addition, the authors did not differentiate between ITNs reported in the “Impression” section of the report versus only the “Findings” section. To fully examine variability in reporting of ITNs, a study should evaluate the reporting style, encompass all radiology subspecialties, and include all CT and MR imaging studies that may lead to detection of ITNs.The purpose of this study was to describe the reporting practices of radiologists for ITNs seen on CT and MR imaging and to determine the factors associated with reporting ITNs in the “Impression” section of the radiology report. We hypothesized that reporting styles would be influenced not only by nodule and patient characteristics but also by radiologist-specific factors, such as subspecialty training and years of experience. Understanding factors associated with variation in reporting practices among radiologists may help to standardize practice patterns, and demonstration of highly variable practices would support the need for guidelines for reporting ITNs seen on CT and MR imaging.     

A Standardized Radiology Template Improves Incidental Adrenal Mass Follow-Up: A Prospective Effectiveness and Implementation Study

PurposeIncidental adrenal masses (IAMs) are common but rarely evaluated. To improve this, we developed a standardized radiology report recommendation template and investigated its implementation and effectiveness.MethodsWe prospectively studied implementation of a standardized IAM reporting template as part of an ongoing quality improvement initiative, which also included primary care provider (PCP) notifications and a straightforward clinical algorithm. Data were obtained via medical record review and a survey of radiologists. Outcomes included template adoption rates and acceptability (implementation measures), as well as the proportion of patients evaluated and time to follow-up (effectiveness outcomes).ResultsOf 4,995 imaging studies, 200 (4.0%) detected a new IAM. The standardized template was used in 54 reports (27.0%). All radiologists surveyed were aware of the template, and 91% affirmed that standardized recommendations are useful. Patients whose reports included the template were more likely to have PCP follow-up after IAM discovery compared with those with no template (53.7% versus 36.3%, P = .03). After adjusting for sex, current or prior malignancy, and provider ordering the initial imaging (PCP, other outpatient provider, or emergency department or inpatient provider), odds of PCP follow-up remained 2.0 times higher (95% confidence interval 1.02-3.9). Patients whose reports included the template had a shorter time to PCP follow-up (log-rank P = .018). PCPs ultimately placed orders for biochemical testing (35.2% versus 18.5%, P = .01), follow-up imaging (40.7% versus 23.3%, P = .02), and specialist referral (22.2% versus 4.8%, P < .01) for a higher proportion of patients who received the template compared with those who did not.ConclusionsUse of a standardized template to communicate IAM recommendations was associated with improved IAM evaluation. Our template demonstrated high acceptability, but additional strategies are necessary to optimize adoption.     

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Improving Appropriate Follow-Up Imaging of Ovarian Cysts: A Quality Improvement Initiative

PurposeIncidental ovarian cysts are frequently detected on imaging. Despite published follow-up consensus statements, there remains variability in radiologist follow-up recommendations and clinician practice patterns. The aim of this study was to evaluate if collaborative ovarian cyst management recommendations and a radiologist decision support tool can improve adherence to follow-up recommendations.MethodsGynecologic oncologists and abdominal radiologists convened to develop collaborative institutional recommendations for the management of incidental, asymptomatic simple ovarian cysts detected on ultrasound, CT, and MRI. The recommendations were developed by modifying the published consensus recommendations developed by the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound on the basis of local practice patterns and the experience of the group members. A less formal process involved the circulation of the published consensus recommendations, followed by suggestions for revisions and subsequent consensus, in similar fashion to the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II. The recommendations were developed by building on the published work of experienced groups to provide the authors’ medical community with a set of recommendations that could be endorsed by both the Department of Gynecology and the Department of Radiology to provide supportive guidance to the clinicians who manage incidental ovarian cysts. The recommendations were integrated into a radiologist decision support tool accessible from the dictation software. Nine months after tool launch, institutional review board approval was obtained, and radiology reports mentioning ovarian cysts in the prior 34 months were retrospectively reviewed. For cysts detected on ultrasound, adherence rates to Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound recommendations were calculated for examinations before tool launch and compared with adherence rates to the collaborative institutional recommendations after tool launch. Additionally, electronic medical records were reviewed to determine the follow-up chosen by the clinician.ResultsFor cysts detected on ultrasound, radiologist adherence to recommendations improved from 50% (98 of 197) to 80% (111 of 139) (P < .05). Overmanagement decreased from 34% (67 of 197) to 10% (14 of 139) (P < .05). A recommendation was considered “overmanaged” if the radiologist recommended follow-up when it was not indicated or if the recommended follow-up time was at a shorter interval than indicated. Clinician adherence to radiologist recommendations showed statistically nonsignificant improvement from 49% (36 of 73) to 57% (27 of 47) (P = .5034).ConclusionsManagement recommendations developed through collaboration with clinicians may help standardize follow-up of ovarian cysts and reduce overutilization.     

Imaging-Detected Incidental Thyroid Nodules that Undergo Surgery: A Single-Center Experience Over 1 Year

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Incidental thyroid nodules are commonly seen on imaging, and their work-up can ultimately lead to surgery. We describe characteristics and pathology results of imaging-detected incidental thyroid nodules that underwent surgery.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A retrospective review was performed of 303 patients who underwent thyroid surgery over a 1-year period to identify patients who presented with incidental thyroid nodules on imaging. Medical records were reviewed for the types of imaging studies that led to detection, nodule characteristics, and surgical pathology.RESULTS:Of 303 patients, 208 patients (69%) had surgery for thyroid nodules. Forty-seven of 208 patients (23%) had incidental thyroid nodules detected on imaging. The most common technique leading to detection was CT (47%). All patients underwent biopsy before surgery. The cytology results were nondiagnostic (6%), benign (4%), atypia of undetermined significance or follicular neoplasm of undetermined significance (23%), follicular neoplasm or suspicious for follicular neoplasm (19%), suspicious for malignancy (17%), and diagnostic of malignancy (30%). Surgical pathology was benign in 24 of 47 (51%) cases of incidental thyroid nodules. In the 23 incidental cancers, the most common histologic type was papillary (87%), the mean size was 1.4 cm, and nodal metastases were present in 7 of 23 cases (30%). No incidental cancers on imaging had distant metastases.CONCLUSIONS:Imaging-detected incidental thyroid nodules led to nearly one-fourth of surgeries for thyroid nodules, and almost half were initially detected on CT. Despite indeterminate or suspicious cytology results that lead to surgery, more than half were benign on final pathology. Guidelines for work-up of incidental thyroid nodules detected on CT could help reduce unnecessary investigations and surgery.

Incidental thyroid nodules (ITNs) are commonly encountered on imaging studies, being seen in 50% of ultrasonographic studies and 16%–18% of CT and MR imaging studies that include the thyroid gland.^1–3 While ITNs are associated with a low rate of malignancy, and subclinical thyroid cancers have an excellent prognosis,^2–6 ITNs pose a management dilemma for radiologists and other clinicians whose concern for missing malignancies may lead to further evaluation for small nonspecific thyroid nodules.The reporting practice of ITNs seen on imaging is highly variable among radiologists.⁷ Radiologists must exercise their judgment when reporting and issuing recommendations regarding incidental thyroid nodules. The reporting of ITN on imaging can lead to further investigation, such as follow-up sonography examinations, fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB), or, in some cases, diagnostic thyroid lobectomy or thyroidectomy.^8,9 Of patients who undergo FNAB, 22%–51% proceed to surgery.^10–12 These surgical patients represent an important group to study because they have higher costs and morbidity associated with the work-up of their ITNs. Thus, it is important to consider the costs and benefits of work-up in patients with ITN who fall into this surgical group.A substantial number of patients who undergo surgery do not have cancer.¹⁰ When the preoperative cytology result from FNAB is malignant, the sensitivity of cytology is high (99%).¹³ However, it is recommended that patients with cytology of “follicular neoplasm,” “suspicion for follicular neoplasm,” and “suspicion for malignancy” also proceed to surgery. With these other categories, the false-positive rate of cytology can be as high as 44%.¹³ In addition, thyroid surgery can result in such complications as recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, hypoparathyroidism, and bleeding. Therefore, radiologists should understand the downstream sequelae of a clinical pathway that begins with an imaging-detected ITN and ends with surgery.The purpose of this study was to describe characteristics and pathology results of ITNs that undergo surgery. We hypothesize that imaging-detected ITN comprise a substantial proportion of surgeries for thyroid nodules, and that many thyroid nodules are in the end benign on final surgical pathology.     

Relationship between Incidental Abnormalities on Screening Thoracic Computed Tomography and Mortality: A Long-Term Follow-Up Analysis

ObjectiveThe present study aimed to assess the relationship between incidental abnormalities on thoracic computed tomography (CT) and mortality in a general screening population using a long-term follow-up analysis.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively collected the medical records and CT images of 840 participants (mean age ± standard deviation [SD], 58.5 ± 6.7 years; 564 male) who underwent thoracic CT at a single health promotion center between 2007 and 2010. Two thoracic radiologists independently reviewed all CT images and evaluated any incidental abnormalities (interstitial lung abnormality [ILA], emphysema, coronary artery calcification [CAC], aortic valve [AV] calcification, and pulmonary nodules). Kaplan–Meier analysis with log-rank and z-tests was performed to assess the relationship between incidental CT abnormalities and all-cause mortality in the subsequent follow-up. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to further identify risk factors of all-cause mortality among the incidental CT abnormalities and clinical factors.ResultsAmong the 840 participants, 55 (6%), 171 (20%), 288 (34%), 396 (47%), and 97 (11%) had findings of ILA, emphysema, CAC, pulmonary nodule, and AV calcification, respectively, on initial CT. The participants were followed up for a mean period ± SD of 10.9 ± 1.4 years. All incidental CT abnormalities were associated with all-cause mortality in univariable analysis (p < 0.05). However, multivariable analysis further revealed fibrotic ILA as an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% confidence interval, 1.02–6.22], p = 0.046). ILA were also identified as an independent risk factor for lung cancer or respiratory disease-related deaths.ConclusionIncidental abnormalities on screening thoracic CT were associated with increased mortality during the long-term follow-up. Among incidental CT abnormalities, fibrotic ILA were independently associated with increased mortality. Appropriate management and surveillance may be required for patients with fibrotic ILA on thoracic CT obtained for general screening purposes.     

Workflow-centred evaluation of an automatic lesion tracking software for chemotherapy monitoring by CT

Objectives

In chemotherapy monitoring, an estimation of the change in tumour size is an important criterion for the assessment of treatment success. This requires a comparison between corresponding lesions in the baseline and follow-up computed tomography (CT) examinations. We evaluate the clinical benefits of an automatic lesion tracking tool that identifies the target lesions in the follow-up CT study and pre-computes the lesion volumes.

Methods

Four radiologists performed volumetric follow-up examinations for 52 patients with and without lesion tracking. In total, 139 lung nodules, liver metastases and lymph nodes were given as target lesions. We measured reading time, inter-reader variability in lesion identification and volume measurements, and the amount of manual adjustments of the segmentation results.

Results

With lesion tracking, target lesion assessment time decreased by 38 % or 22 s per lesion. Relative volume difference between readers was reduced from 0.171 to 0.1. Segmentation quality was comparable with and without lesion tracking.

Conclusions

Our automatic lesion tracking tool can make interpretation of follow-up CT examinations quicker and provide results that are less reader-dependent.

Key Points

• Computed tomography is widely used to follow-up lesions in oncological patients.

• Novel software automatically identifies and measures target lesions in oncological follow-up examinations.

• This enables a reduction of target lesion assessment.

• The automated measurements are less reader-dependent.

     

Factors Affecting Adherence to Recommendations for Additional Imaging of Incidental Findings in Radiology Reports

ObjectiveTo determine the rate at which recommendations for additional imaging (RAIs) of incidental findings on CT are adhered to at a tertiary-care medical center and what factors influence adherence.MethodsWe used a radiology clinical informatics tool (mPower, Nuance Communications Inc, Burlington, Massachusetts) to identify RAIs in reports from all CT examinations performed at a tertiary-care medical center during a 6-month period. For those studies in which the RAI was for incidental findings, we reviewed the patients’ charts to determine if there was appropriate follow-up of the lesion in question.ResultsThe overall rate of adherence to RAIs was 39.1%, and in patients with a same-institution primary care provider (PCP), 56.8% (P < .0001). Adherence was higher in studies ordered in the outpatient setting (P < .0001) and in patients with a same-institution PCP (P < .0001). Among patients with a same-institution PCP, adherence was highest for outpatients (66.7%), followed by patients seen in the emergency department (46.0%) and inpatients (36.0%). Among outpatients, adherence was highest with PCPs (67%) followed by internal medicine subspecialties (50%) and surgery (38%).DiscussionThe rate of adherence to recommendations for additional imaging of incidental findings was 39.1% in this study and higher for patients with a same-institution PCP, studies ordered in the outpatient setting, and in studies ordered by PCPs.