介入医务工作者应对新型冠状病毒感染防控专家共识

2019年12月以来,我国爆发新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)疫情。疫情期间大量患者需要介入手术治疗,存在院内感染隐患,也给疫情防控带来挑战。如何在开展介入手术的同时做好防控工作,对预防院内感染至关重要。为了进一步规范介入医务工作者的医疗行为,做好患者救治和疫情防控工作,中国医师协会介入医师分会组织人员起草了本专家共识。本共识在"疫情防控为重,严防院内感染"的前提下,结合属地突发公共卫生事件等级,对患者进行分类管理,指导介入医务工作者在COVID-19疫情期间安全地开展各类介入手术,同时针对COVID-19疫情期间手术室、门诊和会诊的防控管理,以及教学和科研等方面提出了建议。希望指导介入医务工作者在抗击COVID-19疫情的同时,做好自身的防护,更好地服务患者。     

An expanding role for interventional radiology: Medicare trends in fluoroscopic,endoscopic, and surgical enteric tube placement and maintenance from 2010 to 2018

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to provide an update on trends in physician volume and payments for enteric tube placement and maintenance procedures by method, provider specialty, and practice setting amongst Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2018.Materials and methodsClaims from the Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master File (PSPSMF) for the years 2010 to 2018 were extracted using current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for gastrostomy and jejunostomy placement, as well as conversion of gastrostomy to gastrojejunostomy, fluoroscopy guided and non-image guided replacement. Total volumes and provider reimbursement were analyzed by provider specialty and practice setting.ResultsVolume of de novo placement of all enteric tubes decreased from 157,123 to 106,549 (−32.2%). While endoscopic placement decreased from 133,658 to 81,171 (−39.3%), the volume of fluoroscopic placement increased from 17,999 to 21,277 (18.2%). Fluoroscopic placement was largely performed by interventional radiology (IR) (91.7% in 2018). Surgical placement decreased from 5466 to 4101 (−25.0%). Volume of fluoroscopic replacement increased from 24,799 to 38,470 (55.1%), while non-image guided replacements decreased from 61,377 to 55,116 (−10.2%). Share of both fluoroscopic and non-image guided replacements by advanced practice providers (APPs) more than doubled over this time period.ConclusionDe novo placement of enteric tubes decreased from 2010 to 2018, likely related to increased awareness of the complications and limited benefits in scenarios such as end of life care. In contrast to the diminishing volume for gastroenterologists, there was increased participation by IR in both placement and maintenance procedures under fluoroscopic guidance.Summary statementDecreasing placement of enteric tubes suggests shifting attitudes and recommendations around end-of-life care. Increase in role by IR/APPs highlights the need for comprehensive care in these patients.     

Percutaneous Access of the Modified Hutson Loop for Retrograde Cholangiography,Endoscopy, and Biliary Interventions

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to present the institutional experience of performing endoscopy, cholangiography, and biliary interventions through the modified Hutson loop by interventional radiology.Materials and MethodsA total of 61 of 64 modified Hutson loop access procedures were successful. This single-center retrospective study included 61 successful procedures of biliary interventions using existing modified Hutson loops (surgically affixed subcutaneous jejunal limb adjacent to biliary anastomosis or anastomoses) for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes in 21 patients. Seventeen of 21 patients (81%) had undergone liver transplantation. Indications included biliary strictures (n = 18) and biliary leaks (n = 3). The clinical success and complications were evaluated.ResultsThere were 3 of 26 modified Hutson loop retrograde biliary intervention failures (12%) before introduction of endoscopy and no failures (0 of 38 [0%]) subsequently (P = .06). Endoscopy or cholangioscopy was performed in 19 procedures by interventional radiologists. Retrograde biliary interventions included diagnostic cholangiography (n = 26), cholangioplasty (n = 25), stent placement (n = 29), stent retrieval (n = 25), and biliary drainage catheter placement (n = 5). No procedure-related mortality occurred. There was 1 major complication (duodenal perforation) (1.6%) and 12 minor complications (19%). In the 9 patients undergoing therapeutic interventions for biliary strictures, there was a significant decrease in median alkaline phosphatase (288.5 to 174.5 U/L; P = .03). There was a trend toward decrease in median bilirubin levels (1.7 to 1 mg/dL; P = .06) at 1 month post-intervention.ConclusionsThe modified Hutson loop provided interventional radiologists a safe and effective alternative access to manage biliary complications in patients with biliary-enteric anastomoses. Introduction of the endoscope in interventional radiology has improved the success rate of these procedures.     

Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Imaging Case Volumes

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had significant economic impact on radiology with markedly decreased imaging case volumes. The purpose of this study was to quantify the imaging volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic across patient service locations and imaging modality types.MethodsImaging case volumes in a large health care system were retrospectively studied, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by patient service locations (emergency department, inpatient, outpatient) and modality types (x-ray, mammography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Independent-samples t tests compared the mean weekly volumes in 2020 and 2019.ResultsTotal imaging volume in 2020 (weeks 1-16) declined by 12.29% (from 522,645 to 458,438) compared with 2019. Post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) revealed a greater decrease (28.10%) in imaging volumes across all patient service locations (range 13.60%-56.59%) and modality types (range 14.22%-58.42%). Total mean weekly volume in 2020 post-COVID-19 (24,383 [95% confidence interval 19,478-29,288]) was statistically reduced (P = .003) compared with 33,913 [95% confidence interval 33,429-34,396] in 2019 across all patient service locations and modality types. The greatest decline in 2020 was seen at week 16 specifically for outpatient imaging (88%) affecting all modality types: mammography (94%), nuclear medicine (85%), MRI (74%), ultrasound (64%), interventional (56%), CT (46%), and x-ray (22%).DiscussionBecause the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain, these results may assist in guiding short- and long-term practice decisions based on the magnitude of imaging volume decline across different patient service locations and specific imaging modality types.     

Interventional Radiologists Achieve Equivalent Outcomes and Lower Costs for Totally Implantable Venous Access Device Placement Compared to Operating Room Placement

PurposeTo compare the cost and outcomes of surgical and interventional radiology (IR) placement of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) within a large regional health system to determine the service line with better outcomes and lower costs to the health system.Materials and MethodsA retrospective review of all chest port placements performed in the operating room (OR) and IR suite over 12 months was conducted at a large, integrated health system with 6 major hospitals. Secondary electronic health record and cost data were used to identify TIVAD placements, follow-up procedures indicating port malfunction, early adverse events (within 1 month after the surgery), late adverse events (2–12 months after the procedure), and health system cost of TIVAD placement and management.ResultsFor 799 total port placements included in this analysis, the rate of major adverse events was 1.3% and 1.9% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the early follow-up (P = .5655) and 4.9% and 2.8% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the late follow-up (P = .5437). Malfunction-related follow-up procedure rates were 1.8% and 2.6% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the early follow-up (P = .4787) and 12.4% and 10.5% for the IR and OR groups, respectively, during the late follow-up (P = .4354). The mean cost of port placement per patient was $4,509 and $5,247 for the IR and OR groups, respectively. The difference in per-patient cost of port placement was $1,170 greater for the OR group (P = .0074).ConclusionsThe similar rates of adverse events and follow-up procedures and significant differences in insertion cost suggest that IR TIVAD placement may be more cost effective than surgical placement without affecting the quality.     

The Battle Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Emergency Management and Infection Control in a Radiology Department

ObjectiveTo describe the strategy and the emergency management and infection control procedure of our radiology department during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.MethodsWe set up emergency management and sensing control teams. The team formulated various measures: reconfiguration of the radiology department, personal protection and training of staff, examination procedures for patients suspected of or confirmed with COVID-19 as well as patients without an exposure history or symptoms. Those with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were scanned in the designated fever-CT unit.ResultsFrom January 21, 2020, to March 9, 2020, 3,083 people suspected or confirmed to be infected with COVID-19 underwent fever-CT examinations. Including initial examinations and re-examinations, the total number of fever-CT examinations numbered 3,340. As a result of our precautions, none of the staff of the radiology department were infected with COVID-19.ConclusionStrategic planning and adequate protections can help protect patients and staff against a highly infectious disease while maintaining function at a high-volume capacity.     

The radiology workforce's response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Middle East,North Africa and India

IntroductionThis study aimed to investigate the response of the radiology workforce to the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on professional practice in India and eight other Middle Eastern and North African countries. It further investigated the levels of fear and anxiety among this workforce during the pandemic.MethodsA quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey from 22 May-2 June 2020 among radiology workers employed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey collected information related to the following themes: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) the impact of COVID-19 on radiology practice, and (3) fear and (4) anxiety emanating from the global pandemic.ResultsWe received 903 responses. Fifty-eight percent had completed training on infection control required for handling COVID-19 patients. A large proportion (79.5%) of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that personal protective equipment (PPE) was adequately available at work during the pandemic. The respondents reported experiences of work-related stress (42.9%), high COVID-19 fear score (83.3%) and anxiety (10%) during the study period.ConclusionThere was a perceived workload increase in general x-ray and Computed Tomography imaging procedures because they were the key modalities for the initial and follow-up investigations of COVID-19. However, there was adequate availability of PPE during the study period. Most radiology workers were afraid of being infected with the virus. Fear was predominant among workers younger than 30 years of age and also in temporary staff. Anxiety occurred completely independent of gender, age, experience, country, place of work, and work status.Implications for practiceIt is important to provide training and regular mental health support and evaluations for healthcare professionals, including radiology workers, during similar future pandemics.     

Public Awareness of Interventional Radiology: Population-Based Analysis of the Current State of and Pathways for Improvement

PurposeTo evaluate the awareness of interventional radiology (IR) among the public and identify methods for improvement.Materials and MethodsParticipants (N = 1,000) were anonymously surveyed using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing platform about medical and IR-specific knowledge, preferred methods of acquisition of medical information, and suggestions for improving awareness of IR. The survey consisted of 69 questions, including both Likert Scale and free text questions.ResultsOf the participants, 92% preferred undergoing a minimally invasive procedure over surgery. However, 39.8% recognized IR as a medical specialty, and less than 50% of these participants correctly identified IR as procedurally oriented. Of those who discussed or underwent an IR procedure (n = 113), most were also offered to undergo the procedure performed by a surgeon (n = 66). Furthermore, 71% (n = 20) of those who underwent the procedure performed by a surgeon reported that lack of awareness of IR played a role in their decision. Almost half of the respondents (n = 458) were interested in learning more about IR, particularly the diseases treated and procedures performed (42% and 37%, respectively). Short (<10-minute) educational videos and increased patient education by primary care providers (PCPs) were among the most suggested ways to improve awareness. Regarding the ambiguity of the name “interventional radiology,” most respondents (n = 555) reported this to be true, and “minimally invasive radiologist” was the most preferred alternative (21.18%).ConclusionsLack of awareness of IR may underlie underutilization. When presented with the knowledge that IR improves patient outcomes, minimally invasive procedures by an interventional radiologist are more often desired by the public than surgical options. Educational videos and patient education by PCPs may increase awareness of IR.     

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic Shifts Inpatient Imaging Utilization

ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on imaging utilization across practice settings. The purpose of this study was to quantify the change in the composition of inpatient imaging volumes for modality types and Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA retrospective study of inpatient imaging volumes in a large health care system was performed, analyzing weekly imaging volumes by modality types (radiography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, interventional radiology, nuclear medicine) in years 2020 and 2019. The data set was split to compare pre-COVID-19 (weeks 1-9) and post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-16) periods. Further subanalyses compared early post-COVID-19 (weeks 10-13) and late post-COVID-19 (weeks 14-16) periods. Statistical comparisons were performed using χ² and independent-samples t tests.ResultsCompared with 2019, total inpatient imaging volume in 2020 post-COVID-19, early and late post-COVID-19 periods, declined by 13.6% (from 78,902 to 68,168), 16.6% (from 45,221 to 37,732), and 9.6% (from 33,681 to 30,436), respectively. By week 16, inpatient imaging volume rebounded and was only down 4.2% (from 11,003 to 10,546). However, a statistically significant shift (P < .0001) in the 2020 composition mix was observed largely comprised of radiography (74.3%), followed by CT (12.7%), ultrasound (8%), MRI (2.4%), interventional radiology (2.3%), and nuclear medicine (0.4%). Although the vast majority of imaging studies declined, few Current Procedural Terminology–coded groups showed increased trends in imaging volumes in the late post-COVID-19 period, including CT angiography chest, radiography chest, and ultrasound venous duplex.DiscussionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a decrease in inpatient imaging volumes accompanied by a shift away from cross-sectional imaging toward radiography. These findings could have significant implications in planning for a potential resurgence.     

Hallazgos tomográficos entre sobrevivientes y no-sobrevivientes con COVID-19 y utilidad clínica de una puntuación de tomografía torácica

BackgroundMany patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been diagnosed with computed tomography (CT). A prognostic tool based on CT findings could be useful for predicting death from COVID-19.ObjectivesTo compare the chest CT findings of patients who survived COVID-19 versus those of patients who died of COVID-19 and to determine the usefulness the clinical usefulness of a CT scoring system for COVID-19.MethodsWe included 124 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections who were hospitalized between April 1, 2020 and July 25, 2020.ResultsWhereas ground-glass opacities were the most common characteristic finding in survivors (75%), crazy paving was the most characteristic finding in non-survivors (65%). Atypical findings were present in 46% of patients. The chest CT score was directly proportional to mortality; a score ≥ 18 was the best cutoff for predicting death, yielding 70% sensitivity (95%CI: 47%-87%).ConclusionsOur results suggest that atypical lesions are more prevalent in this cohort. The chest CT score had high sensitivity for predicting hospital mortality     

Exacerbation of Inequities in Use of Diagnostic Radiology During the Early Stages of Reopening After COVID-19

ObjectiveAssess diagnostic radiology examination utilization and associated social determinants of health during the early stages of reopening after state-mandated shutdown of nonurgent services because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsThis institutional review board–approved, retrospective study assessed all patients with diagnostic radiology examinations performed at an academic medical center with eight affiliated outpatient facilities before (January 1, 2020, to March 8, 2020) and after (June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020) the COVID-19 shutdown. Examinations during the shut down (March 9, 2020, to June 6, 2020) were excluded. Patient-specific factors (eg, race, ethnicity), imaging modalities, and care settings were extracted from the Research Data Warehouse. Primary outcome was the number of diagnostic radiology examinations per day compared pre- and post-COVID-19 shutdown. Univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression determined features associated with completing an examination.ResultsDespite resumption of nonurgent services, marked decrease in radiology examination utilization persisted in all care settings post-COVID-19 shutdown (869 examinations per day preshutdown [59,080 examinations in 68 days] versus 502 examinations per day postshutdown [19,594 examinations in 39 days]), with more significantly decreased odds ratios for having examinations in inpatient and outpatient settings versus in the emergency department. Inequities worsened, with patients from communities with high rates of poverty, unemployment, and chronic disease having significantly lower odds of undergoing radiology examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown. Patients of Asian race and Hispanic ethnicity had significantly lower odds ratios for having examinations post-COVID-19 shutdown compared with White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively.DiscussionThe COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated known pre-existing inequities in diagnostic radiology utilization. Resources should be allocated to address subgroups of patients who may be less likely to receive necessary diagnostic radiology examinations, potentially leading to compromised patient safety and quality of care.     

Hemodialysis Catheters in Infants: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study

PurposeEvaluate technical aspects and outcomes of insertion/maintenance of hemodialysis (HD) central venous catheter (CVC) during infancy.Materials and MethodsSingle-center retrospective study of 29 infants who underwent 49 HD-CVC insertions between 2002 and 2016. Demographics, procedural, and post-procedural details, interventional radiology (IR) maintenance procedures, technical modifications, complications, and outcomes were evaluated. Technical adjustments during HD-CVC placement to adapt catheter length to patient size were labeled “modifications.” CVCs requiring return visit to IR were called IR-maintenance procedures. Mean age and weight at HD-CVC insertion were 117 days and 4.9 kg.ResultsOf the 29 patients, 13 (45%) required renal-replacement-therapy (RRT) as neonates, 10 (34%) commenced RRT with peritoneal dialysis (PD), and 19 (66%) with HD. Fifteen nontunneled and 34 tunneled HD-CVCs were inserted while patients were ≤1 year. Technical modifications were required placing 25/49 (51%) HD-CVCs: 5/15 (33%) nontunneled and 20/34 (59%) tunneled catheters (P = .08). Patients underwent ≤6 dialysis-cycles/patient during infancy (mean 2.3), and a mean of 4.1 and 49 HD-sessions/catheter for nontunneled and tunneled HD-CVCs, respectively. Mean primary and secondary device service, and total access site intervals for tunneled HD-CVCs were 75, 115, and 201 days, respectively. A total of 26 of 49 (53%) patients required IR-maintenance procedures. Nontunneled lines had greater catheter-related bloodstream infections per 1,000 catheter-days than tunneled HD-CVCs (9.25 vs. 0.85/1,000 catheter days; P = .02). Nineteen patients (65%) survived over 1 year. At final evaluation (December 2017): 8/19 survived transplantation, 5/19 remained on RRT, 2/19 completely recovered, 1/19 lost to follow-up, and 3 died at 1.3, 2, and 10 years.ConclusionsPlacement/maintenance of HD-CVCs in infants pose specific challenges, requiring insertion modifications, and IR-maintenance procedures to maintain function.     

Abdominal Computed Tomography Angiography and Venography in Evaluation of Hemorrhagic and Thrombotic lesions in Hospitalized COVID-19 patients

PurposeTo report imaging findings at computed tomography angiography (CTA) and venography (CTV) of the abdomen and pelvis in evaluation of hemorrhagic and thrombotic lesions in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsIn this retrospective observational study, patients admitted to a single tertiary care center from April 1 to July 20, 2020, who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and developed acute abdominal pain or decreasing hemoglobin levels over the course of hospitalization were included. Abdominal CTA/CTV imaging studies performed in these patients were reviewed, and acute hemorrhagic or thromboembolic findings were recorded.ResultsA total of 40 patients (mean age, 59.7 years; 20 men, 20 women) were evaluated. Twenty-five patients (62.5%) required intensive care unit (ICU) admission and 15 patients (37.5%) were treated in the medical ward. Hemorrhagic complications were detected in 19 patients (47.5%), the most common was intramuscular hematoma diagnosed in 17 patients; It involved the iliopsoas compartment unilaterally in 10 patients, bilaterally in 2 patients and the rectus sheath in 5 cases. Pelvic extraperitoneal hemorrhage was found in 3 patients, and mesenteric hematoma in one patient. Thromboembolic events were diagnosed in 8 patients (20%) including; arterial thrombosis (n = 2), venous thrombosis (n = 2), splenic infarct (n = 1), bowel ischemia (n = 1) and multiple sites of thromboembolism (n = 2).ConclusionOur study highlights that both hemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications can be seen in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. It is important that radiologists maintain a high index of suspicion for early diagnosis of these complications.     

Distal Radial Artery Access for Noncoronary Endovascular Treatment Is a Safe and Feasible Technique

PurposeTo evaluate safety and feasibility of distal radial artery (DRA) access for noncoronary interventional radiology procedures.Materials and MethodsAll interventional radiology procedures by means of DRA puncture from July 2017 to August 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-two punctures in 56 patients were included, mostly in male patients (84% vs 16%). Mean age was 67.8 years (range, 33.3–87.3 years); mean height was 172 cm (range, 142–190 cm); and mean weight was 83 kg (range, 43–120 kg). Procedural characteristics, technical success, and complication rates were gathered from the medical records and follow-up ultrasound when available. Prerequisites for DRA access were adequate radioulnar collateral circulation, sufficient radial artery diameter, and informed consent in patients initially intended for conventional transradial access.ResultsProcedures included transarterial chemoembolization (n = 34), yittrium-90 pretreatment angiography (n = 21), yittrium-90 administration (transarterial radioembolization; n = 20), and embolization of visceral organs (n = 7). Both 4-Fr (n = 35) and 5-Fr (n = 46) sheaths were used. Technical success of DRA access was 97.6%, with conversion to transfemoral access in 2 cases (2.4%). No major complications were reported as a result of DRA access.ConclusionDRA access is a feasible and safe technique for abdominal interventional radiology embolization procedures. No radial artery occlusion or other major complications were observed in patients who underwent follow-up ultrasound.     

Recent trends in central venous catheter placement: a comparison of interventional radiology with other specialties

The authors determined changing trends and growth in tunneled and nontunneled central venous catheter placement procedures. With use of Medicare billing data for tunneled and nontunneled catheter placement, a comparison was made among interventional radiology (IR), surgery, anesthesia, and internal medicine. There has been substantial growth in the placement of central venous catheters. Currently, a minority of these procedures are performed in IR departments. However, there has been significant growth in the radiologic placement of both types of catheters.     

Time-Driven Cost Analysis of Noncuffed Venous Catheter Placement in Infants: Bedside versus IR Suite

PurposeTo compare the direct bundled costs of interventional radiology (IR) suite versus bedside placement of noncuffed central venous catheters in infants.MethodsA single-center retrospective review was performed of all noncuffed upper extremity (peripherally inserted central venous catheter [PICC]) and tunneled femoral (tunneled femoral central venous catheter [TCVC]) catheters placed in infants between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Propensity score matching was performed adjusting for age, birth weight, procedure weight, and catheter days. Process maps for each procedure were created based on location and sedation type. Technical success and complications were recorded for each placement. The total direct bundled cost for each catheter placement was calculated by summing the procedure and complication costs.ResultsA total of 142 procedures were performed on 126 matched patients with a technical success of 96% at the bedside and 100% in the IR suite (P = .08). The complication rates did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = .51). The total direct bundled costs for catheter placement were $1421.3 ± 2213.2 at the bedside and $2256.8 ± 3264.7 in the IR suite (P = .001).ConclusionsThe bundled cost of bedside femoral catheter placement is significantly less than that of fluoroscopic TCVC and PICC placement performed in the IR suite, mainly related to differences in sedation costs.     

Low Detection Rate of Pulmonary Embolism in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Suspected Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Single-Centre UK Study

PurposeCritically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk of thrombosis. There are limited data on PE rates in COVID-19 patients at presentation to the emergency department (ED). In this study, we evaluated the detection rates of PE in patients presenting to the ED with suspected and proven COVID-19.MethodsA single-centre retrospective study was undertaken of 285 consecutive patients undergoing CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) in the Emergency Department at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in the United Kingdom between 25 March and 30 April 2020. At our institution, CTPA is performed in all patients undergoing CT for triage. The study group consisted of patients considered COVID-19 positive based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results and CTPA findings. The detection rate of PE in COVID-19 patients was compared to patients undergoing CTPA for suspected PE only and for suspected COVID-19 with no COVID CT findings and negative PCR (control group 1); and CTPAs prior to the coronavirus pandemic (control group 2).ResultsOne of 48 patients in the study group had a PE (2%) compared to 25/215 (12%) in control group 1 and 10/50 (20%) in control group 2. Prevalence of PE in the study group was lower than in control group 1 (P = 0.058) and compared to control group 2 (P = 0.005). Eleven patients undergoing CTPA had negative PCR but positive CT for COVID-19.ConclusionDetection rate of pulmonary embolus is low in patients with COVID-19 undergoing CTPA on a triage pathway.     

Safety of Conscious Sedation In Interventional Radiology

Purpose: To identify rates of adverse events associated with the use of conscious sedation in interventional radiology. Methods: In a 5-month period, prospective data were collected on patients undergoing conscious sedation for interventional radiology procedures (n = 594). Adverse events were categorized as respiratory, sedative, or major adverse events. Respiratory adverse events were those that required oral airway placement, ambu bag, or jaw thrust. Sedation adverse events were unresponsiveness, oxygen saturation less than 90%, use of flumazenil/naloxone, or agitation. Major adverse events were hypotension, intubation, CPR, or cardiac arrest. The frequency of adverse events for the five most common radiology procedures were determined. Results: The five most common procedures (total n = 541) were biliary tube placement/exchange (n = 182), tunneled catheter placement (n = 135), diagnostic arteriography (n = 125), vascular interventions (n = 52), and other catheter insertions (n = 46). Rates for respiratory, sedation, and major adverse events were 4.7%, 4.2%, and 2.0%, respectively. The most frequent major adverse event was hypotension (2.0%). Biliary procedures had the highest rate of total adverse events (p < .05) and respiratory adverse events (p < .05). Conclusion: The frequency of adverse events is low with the use of conscious sedation during interventional procedures. The highest rates occurred during biliary interventions.     

Identifying Factors Important to Patients for Resuming Elective Imaging During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PurposeTo identify factors important to patients for their return to elective imaging during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsIn all, 249 patients had elective MRIs postponed from March 23, 2020, to April 24, 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these patients, 99 completed a 22-question survey about living arrangement and health care follow-up, effect of imaging postponement, safety of imaging, and factors important for elective imaging. Mann-Whitney U, Fisher’s exact, χ² tests, and logistic regression analyses were performed. Statistical significance was set to P ≤ .05 with Bonferroni correction applied.ResultsOverall, 68% of patients felt imaging postponement had no impact or a small impact on health, 68% felt it was fairly or extremely safe to obtain imaging, and 53% thought there was no difference in safety between hospital-based and outpatient locations. Patients who already had imaging performed or rescheduled were more likely to feel it was safe to get an MRI (odds ratio [OR] 3.267, P = .028) and that the hospital setting was safe (OR 3.976, P = .004). Staff friendliness was the most important factor related to an imaging center visit (95% fairly or extremely important). Use of masks by staff was the top infection prevention measure (94% fairly or extremely important). Likelihood of rescheduling imaging decreased if a short waiting time was important (OR = 0.107, P = .030).ConclusionAs patients begin to feel that it is safe to obtain imaging examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic, many factors important to their imaging experience can be considered by radiology practices when developing new strategies to conduct elective imaging.     

Medicare Reimbursement Trends for Interventional Radiology Procedures: 2012 to 2020

PurposeTo investigate the reimbursement trends for interventional radiology (IR) procedures from 2012 to 2020.Materials and MethodsReimbursement data from the Physician Fee Schedule look-up tool from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was compiled for 20 common IR procedures. The authors then investigated compensation trends after adjusting for inflation and from the unadjusted data between 2012 and 2020.ResultsFrom 2012 to 2020, the mean unadjusted reimbursement for procedures decreased by ?6.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], ?13.5% to ?0.34%). This trend was even more profound after inflation was taken into account, with a mean decline in adjusted reimbursement of ?18.7% (95% CI, ?24.4% to ?12.9%) during the study period, with a mean yearly decline of ?2.8%. The difference between the mean unadjusted and adjusted payment amounts was significant (P = .012). Similarly, linear regression analysis of the adjusted average reimbursement across all procedures revealed an overall decline from 2012 to 2020 (R² = 0.97), indicating a steady decline in reimbursement over time.ConclusionsIn just under a decade, IR has experienced significant reimbursement cuts by Medicare, as demonstrated by both the unadjusted and inflation-adjusted payment trends. Knowledge of these trends is critically important for practicing interventional radiologists, leaders within the field, and legislators, who may play a role in formulating future reimbursement schedules for IR. These data may be used to help support more amenable reimbursement plans to sustain and facilitate the growth of the specialty.