Abdominopelvic CT Imaging Findings in the Emergency Department in Patients With HIV Positive Status: Single Institute Experience

ObjectiveTo assess emergency department (ED) abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) imaging utilization and findings in patients with known human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive status.Materials and MethodsA retrospective chart review of imaging, clinical, and laboratory data was performed for HIV positive patients who demonstrated HIV-related findings on abdominopelvic CT imaging performed within the ED.ResultsOne hundred and eighty-eight patients with 522 CT scans of the abdomen and/or pelvis were reviewed. 47 patients with HIV presenting to the ED on 82 separate occasions were included in this study (mean age 43.3 years). Patients presented to the ED with infectious/inflammatory disease (n = 54) or history of HIV-related malignancy or new/worsening HIV-related malignancy (n = 28). The most common findings on abdominopelvic CT were anorectal pathology including anorectal abscess or proctitis (n = 22), followed by colitis (n = 19). Findings of HIV-associated malignancy were less common, including anal/rectal cancer (n = 7), Kaposi's sarcoma (n = 4), and lymphoma (n = 2). At the time of ED visit, 25.6% (n = 21) of patients had acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Higher WBC counts were found in the infectious/inflammatory group (P = 0.021) and patients without AIDS (P = 0.0159), while lower WBC counts were associated with new or worsening malignancy (P = 0.007) and AIDS (P = 0.0000). Patients with AIDS were more likely to be deceased at the time of our study.ConclusionsThe majority of ED visits within our population were attributed to infectious/inflammatory etiologies. CT findings demonstrated predominantly infectious/inflammatory processes, with anorectal pathology being the most common. Findings of malignancy on CT were less common, while opportunistic infections and AIDS-defining malignancies were uncommon.     

Addressing ethnic disparities in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes for COVID-19

PurposeRacial and ethnic disparities have exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic as the healthcare system is overwhelmed. While Hispanics are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, little is known about ethnic disparities in the hospital settings. This study investigates imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the Emergency Department (ED) and during hospitalization.MethodsThrough retrospective chart review, we included 331 symptomatic COVID-19 patients (mean age 53.2 years) at a metropolitan healthcare system from March to June 2020. Poisson regression was used to compare diagnostic imaging utilization and clinical outcomes between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients.ResultsAfter adjusting for confounders, no statistically significant difference was found between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients for the number of weekly chest X-rays. Results were categorized into four clinical outcomes: ED management (0.16 ± 0.05 vs. 0.14 ± 0.8, p:0.79); requiring inpatient management (1.31 ± 0.11 vs. 1.46 ± 0.16, p:0.43); ICU admission without invasive ventilation (1.4 ± 0.17 vs. 1.35 ± 0.26, p:0.86); and ICU admission and ventilator support (3.29 ± 0.22 vs. 3.59 ± 0.37, p:0.38). There were no statistically significant relative differences in adjusted prevalence rate between ethnic groups for all clinical outcomes (p > 0.05). There was a statistically significant longer adjusted length of stay (days) in non-Hispanics for two subcohorts: inpatient management (8.16 ± 0.31 vs. 9.72 ± 0.5, p < 0.01) and ICU admission without invasive ventilation (10.39 ± 0.57 vs. 13.45 ± 1.13, p < 0.01).ConclusionsFor Hispanic and non-Hispanic COVID-19 patients in the ED or hospitalized, there were no statistically significant differences in imaging utilization and clinical outcomes.     

Increased per-patient imaging utilization in an emergency department setting during COVID-19

IntroductionCOVID-19 has resulted in decreases in absolute imaging volumes, however imaging utilization on a per-patient basis has not been reported. Here we compare per-patient imaging utilization, characterized by imaging studies and work relative value units (wRVUs), in an emergency department (ED) during a COVID-19 surge to the same period in 2019.MethodsThis retrospective study included patients presenting to the ED from April 1–May 1, 2020 and 2019. Patients were stratified into three primary subgroups: all patients (n = 9580, n = 5686), patients presenting with respiratory complaints (n = 1373, n = 2193), and patients presenting without respiratory complaints (n = 8207, n = 3493). The primary outcome was imaging studies/patient and wRVU/patient. Secondary analysis was by disposition and COVID status. Comparisons were via the Wilcoxon rank-sum or Chi-squared tests.ResultsThe total patients, imaging exams, and wRVUs during the 2020 and 2019 periods were 5686 and 9580 (−41%), 6624 and 8765 (−24%), and 4988 and 7818 (−36%), respectively, and the percentage patients receiving any imaging was 67% and 51%, respectively (p < .0001). In 2020 there was a 170% relative increase in patients presenting with respiratory complaints. In 2020, patients without respiratory complaints generated 24% more wRVU/patient (p < .0001) and 33% more studies/patient (p < .0001), highlighted by 38% more CTs/patient.ConclusionWe report increased per-patient imaging utilization in an emergency department during COVID-19, particularly in patients without respiratory complaints.     

Computed tomography for detection of septic foci: Retrospective analysis of patients presenting to the emergency department

ObjectiveSepsis is defined as organ dysfunction due to severe infection. Septic patients face a significant mortality risk. Thus, timely recognition with prompt focus identification and control are essential. This study aims to determine the current role of computed tomography (CT) in the diagnostic workup of septic patients.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 357 patients in the emergency department (ED) of a large university center with suspected sepsis in a two-year period. A total of 132 patients underwent CT scanning within 72 h of admission. Patients were characterized by clinical and laboratory findings. CT reports were categorized and matched with clinical data.ResultsOf 357 ED patients with suspected sepsis, 37.0% (132/357) underwent CT imaging within 72 h. The most commonly identified septic foci in CT were chest 38.6% (49/127), abdomen 22.0% (28/127) and genitourinary tract 20.5% (26/127) in descending order. The focus detection rate was 76.5% per patient with a concurrent number-needed-to-scan of 1.31. Contrast medium administration in CT did not improve focus detection rate (p = 0.631) or diagnostic confidence in this patient population (p = 0.432). CT had a positive predictive value of 81.82% (CI 76.31 to 86.28%) in predicting the focus of the discharge diagnosis. Follow-up imaging in patients with unclear focus reveals a new focus in 39.5% of patients.ConclusionsOur investigation of the role of CT in ED patients with suspected sepsis indicated a high positive predictive value for CT with regard to the discharge diagnosis. Repeat imaging may help identify further septic foci in a subgroup with persistently unclear focus. Use of contrast medium seems less relevant for focus detection than expected, as it did not increase diagnostic confidence.     

Yield of head CT for acute findings in patients presenting to the emergency department

ObjectivesThe aim of our study was to evaluate the yield of head CT in the ED in different age groups and different referral indications.Patients and methodsRecords of one large academic tertiary care ED were retrospectively reviewed for consecutive adult patients who underwent a head CT between January 1st 2017 and February 10th 2017. CT referral forms and interpretations were obtained and evaluated for demographics, referral indications, and findings.Scans were divided into three groups: acute findings, chronic findings, and normal. The cohort was divided into three age groups. Associations between referral indications and acute findings were calculated.ResultsOverall, 1536 of adult patients with ED head CT were included. Acute findings were found in 239/1536 (15.5%) of the CTs. The frequency of acute findings increased with age (p = 0.027). The most common acute findings were brain hemorrhage (32.6%), infarct (27.6%), and mass (23%). The top three referral indications were focal neurologic deficit (28%), trauma (24.7%), and headache (17.5%).The rates of positive acute findings for different referral indications were seizure 27%, confusion 20%, syncope 19%, focal neurologic deficit 16%, head injury 15%, headache 12%, and dizziness 8%.ConclusionThis study shows the yield of ED head CT for acute findings for different age groups and for different referral indications. The frequency of acute findings increased with age. Suspected seizure had the highest association with an acute finding, whereas dizziness had the lowest association.     

An age-corrected matched-pair study of erectile function in patients treated with dose-escalated adaptive image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy vs. high-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer

PurposeTo compare erectile dysfunction (ED) after adaptive dose-escalated image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT) and high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy (HDR) monotherapy.Methods and MaterialsLow- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients treated with IG-IMRT or HDR were matched on pretreatment ED, age, Gleason score, T-stage, and prostate specific antigen. Patients who received androgen deprivation therapy were excluded. ED was graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4. Actuarial rates of ED were computed by the Kaplan–Meier method.ResultsThere were 384 patients with median followup of 2.0 years (0.5–6.1) for IG-IMRT and 2.0 years (0.5–8.7) for HDR. The median IG-IMRT dose was 75.6 Gy and HDR dose 38 Gy in four fractions. For patients with no pretreatment ED, actuarial rates of requiring intervention (Grade ≥2 ED) at 3 years were 31% for IG-IMRT and 19% for HDR (p = 0.23), and impotence despite medical intervention (Grade 3) were 0% for IG-IMRT and 6% for HDR (p = 0.06). For patients with Grade 1 pretreatment ED, Grade ≥2 ED at 3 years were 47% for IG-IMRT and 34% for HDR (p = 0.79), and Grade 3 ED were 15% in both groups (p = 0.59). For patients with Grade 2 pretreatment ED, Grade 3 ED at 3 years were 22% for IG-IMRT and 37% for HDR (p = 0.70). No variables were predictive of Grade ≥2 ED following treatment.ConclusionsRates of ED requiring medical intervention for both IG-IMRT and HDR are low and equivalent. Even patients with ED before treatment are likely to maintain potency with medication use at 3 years following treatment.     

Does Distance Matter? Effect of Having a Dedicated CT Scanner in the Emergency Department on Completion of CT Imaging and Final Patient Disposition Times

PurposeTo evaluate whether presence of a CT scanner in the emergency department (ED) improves ED workflow by decreasing time between imaging requisition and completion, and time to final patient disposition.MethodsInstitutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective study conducted on 2,142 consecutive, acute thoracic, abdomino- pelvic imaging requests from 2 ED hospital campuses affiliated with the same academic institution, August 1 to October 31, 2012. Of these patients, only 1,696 had complete records and were used for analysis. One hospital had a CT scanner in the ED; the other was in the radiology department, 300 meters from the ED. Patients were stratified based on acuity of CT indication, interpreting radiologist training level, and time of day. Time points were compared between hospitals: (1) time of CT requisition receipt to time of scan initiation (2) time from scan initiation to time of preliminary report by resident or fellow, or verbally by staff to the ED; and (3) time of CT requisition receipt to time of final patient disposition.ResultsDecreases in time, favoring the institution with the ED CT scanner, are 16 min (P < .0001); 15 minutes (P < .0001); and 19 minutes (P < .04) for the 3 times, respectively. Significant differences were seen in morning and overnight shifts and for CT reporting times with higher radiology levels of training (20 min, P = .04; and 18 min, P < .0001 for staff and postgraduate year-5 residents, respectively).ConclusionsPresence of an ED CT scanner is associated with decreases in time to CT scan completion, radiologic interpretation, and patient disposition.     

Utility of ultrasound after a negative CT abdomen and pelvis in the emergency department

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to assess the utility of an abdominal and/or pelvic ultrasound (US) performed within 24 h after a negative CT of the abdomen and pelvis (CTAP) in the emergency department (ED). The secondary endpoint is to assess whether there is a significant increase in length of stay (LOS) in the ED due to immediate US reimaging.MethodWe reviewed the imaging reports of 335 patients over the course of 3 years in our ED who had an US within 24 h after a negative CTAP. We then assessed type of US and whether the US showed any acute findings. We also evaluated LOS in the ED.ResultsOut of 335 patients, there were only three US cases suspicious for acute surgical pathology (3/335 or 0.9%). On 30-day clinical follow-up, only one of the three cases was confirmed as cholecystitis on pathology. The most common non-surgical findings on US not initially reported on CTAP were ovarian cysts (29/83) and gallstones (9/83). Additionally, the LOS for patients who received both a CTAP and US was 119 min longer than patients who only received a CTAP.ConclusionUS abdomen and/or pelvis reimaging within 24 h following a negative CTAP is unlikely to change surgical management in the acute setting. US reimaging can still be useful in diagnosing non-surgical pathology, which could serve to explain the patient's pain. US reimaging after negative CTAP is associated with an average increase in the ED LOS.     

Correlation of laboratory parameters and Chest CT findings in young adults with COVID-19 and comparison of imaging findings with children

PurposeWe aimed to compare COVID-19 imaging findings of young adults (19–35 years of age) with those of children (0–18 years) and to correlate imaging findings of young adults with their laboratory tests.Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included Real Time-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed 130 young adults (mean age: 28.39 ± 4.77; 65 male, 65 female) and 36 children (mean age: 12.41 ± 4.51; 17 male, 19 female), between March and June 2020. COVID-19 related imaging findings on chest CT were examined in young adults and compared with children by the Mann-Whitney U, and Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Laboratory examinations of young adults were assessed in terms of correlation with radiological findings by the Spearman's correlation analysis.ResultsBilateral multiple distributions (p = 0.014), subpleural involvement, and pleural thickening (p = 0.004), GGOs with internal consolidations were more frequent in adults (p = 0.009). Infiltrations were significantly larger than 20 mm in young adults (p = 0.011). The rates of feeding vessel sign, vascular enlargement, and halo sign were significantly higher in young adults (p < 0.003). Highly significant positive correlations were found between radiological and biochemical parameters.ConclusionDistribution, size, and pattern of COVID-19 related imaging findings differed in children and young adults. Radiological findings were correlated with biochemical parameters but not with blood count results of young adults.     

Ionizing Radiation Knowledge Among Emergency Department Providers

PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess knowledge of ionizing radiation exposure from diagnostic imaging examinations among emergency department (ED) providers.MethodsAn electronic questionnaire was distributed to ED providers in a five-hospital university-affiliated health care system. Providers included attending emergency medicine (EM) physicians, EM residents, and midlevel providers (MLPs) (nurse practitioners and physicians assistants). Data were collected and analyzed.ResultsOne hundred six of 210 providers (41 attending physicians, 32 residents, and 31 MLPs) completed the survey, for a response rate of 50.5%. More than two in five providers (44.6%) could not correctly identify which of six common imaging modalities used ionizing radiation. MLPs were more likely to incorrectly identify radiography (25%) and fluoroscopy (29%) as modalities that did not use ionizing radiation (P = .01 and P = .25 respectively). Fewer attending physicians (14.6%) than residents (37.5%) were not very comfortable or were uncomfortable explaining the risks of radiation to patients. Nearly half of attending physicians (47.5%) and nearly three-quarters of residents (71.9%) were not very comfortable, were uncomfortable, or were extremely uncomfortable explaining the amount of radiation in certain imaging tests to patients. MLPs were more likely to incorrectly rank a selection of imaging tests by radiation exposure (P = .002). MLPs were more likely to incorrectly answer a question on the effects of ionizing radiation on patients (P = .01).ConclusionsAmong ED providers, there are knowledge gaps regarding the presence and effect of ionizing radiation in diagnostic imaging tests. MLPs were more likely to make factual errors, while EM residents were least comfortable counseling patients about radiation risks.     

Chest CT features and progression of patients with coronavirus disease 2019

Objectives:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major public health emergency. It poses a grave threat to human life and health. The purpose of the study is to investigate the chest CT findings and progression of the disease observed in COVID-19 patients.Methods:Forty-nine confirmed cases of adult COVID-19 patients with common type, severe and critically severe type were included in this retrospective single-center study. The thin-section chest CT features and progress of the disease were evaluated. The clinical and chest imaging findings of COVID-19 patients with different severity types were compared. The CT severity score and MuLBSTA score (a prediction of mortality risk) were calculated in those patients.Results:Among the 49 patients, 35 patients (71%) were common type and 14 patients (28%) were severe and critically severe type. Nearly all patients (98%) had pure ground-glass opacities (GGO) in CT imaging. Of the severe and critically severe type patients, 86% exhibited GGO with consolidation, in comparison with 54% of the patients with common type. Fibrosis presented in 79% of the severe and critically severe type patients and 43% of the common type patients. The severe and critically severe type patients were significantly more prone to experience five-lobe involvement compared to the common type patients (p = 0.002). The severe and critically severe type patients also had higher CT severity and MuLBSTA scores than the common type patients (5.43 ± 2.38 vs 3.37 ± 2.40, p < 0.001;and 10.21 ± 3.83 vs 4.63 ± 3.43, p < 0.001, respectively). MuLBSTA score was positively correlated with admittance to the intensive care unit (p = 0.005, r = 0.351). Nineteen patients underwent three times CT scan. The interval between first and second CT scan was 4[4,8] days, second and third was 3[2,4] days. There were greater improvements in the third CT follow-up findings compared to the second (p = 0.002).Conclusions:The severe and critically severe type patients often experienced more severe lung lesions, including GGO with consolidation. The CT severity score and MuLBSTA score may be helpful for the assessment of COVID-19 severity and progression.Advances in knowledge:Chest CT has the value of evaluated radiographical features of COVID-19 and allow for dynamic observation of the disease progression. Considering coagulation disorder of COVID-19, MuLBSTA score may need to be updated to increase new understanding of COVID-19.     

Endovascular Therapy for Vasculogenic Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Arterial and Venous Therapies

PurposeTo systematically review and perform a meta-analysis on the safety and efficacy of endovascular therapy in the treatment of the two most common etiologies of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED): veno-occlusive dysfunction (VOD) and arterial insufficiency (AI).Materials and MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases were searched for published English literature regarding endovascular ED treatments. Case series (n ≥ 3) were included. Multiple data points were obtained, including demographic data, etiology, diagnosis method, imaging studies, treatment approach, technical success, clinical success, complications, and follow-up.ResultsSixteen relevant articles were obtained and a total of 212 patients with VOD and 162 with AI were identified. The VOD cohort were treated either percutaneously (60.4%; n = 128) or after surgical exposure of the deep dorsal vein (33.5%, n = 71), or it was unspecified (6.1%; n = 13). The most common embolic used was n-butyl cyanoacrylate (51.9%; n = 109). Meta-analysis found an overall clinical success rate of 59.8% in VOD patients. Complications occurred in 5.2% of patients (n = 11), with 9 considered to be mild and 2 considered to be severe. The AI cohort contained 162 patients most commonly treated via stenting of the internal pudendal artery (40.1%; n = 65). Meta-analysis found an overall clinical success rate of 63.2% in AI patients. Complications occurred in 4.9% of patients (n = 8), with 4 considered to be mild and 4 considered to be severe.ConclusionsEndovascular therapy for medically refractory ED is safe and may provide a treatment alternative to more invasive surgical management; however, conclusions are limited by the heterogeneity of clinical success definitions among the included studies.     

The impact of COVID-19 upon student radiographers and clinical training

IntroductionTo investigate student clinical placement concerns and opinions, during the initial COVID-19 pandemic outbreak and to inform educational institution support planning.MethodsBetween mid-June to mid-July 2020, educational institutions from 12 countries were invited to participate in an online survey designed to gain student radiographer opinion from a wide geographical spread and countries with varying levels of COVID-19 cases.Results1277 respondents participated, of these 592 had completed clinical placements during January to June 2020. Accommodation and cohabiting risks were identified as challenging, as was isolation from family, travel to clinical placements, and to a lesser extent childcare. Students stated they had been affected by the feeling of isolation and concerns about the virus whilst on placement. Overall 35.4% of all respondents were ‘Not at all worried’ about being a radiographer, however, 64.6% expressed varying levels of concern and individual domestic or health situations significantly impacted responses (p ≤ 0.05). Year 4 students and recent graduates were significantly more likely to be ‘Not worried at all’ compared to Year 2 and 3 students (p ≤ 0.05). The need for improved communication regarding clinical placements scheduling was identified as almost 50% of students on clinical placements between January to June 2020 identified the completion of assessments as challenging. Furthermore, only 66% of respondents with COVID-19 imaging experience stated being confident with personal protective equipment (PPE) use.ConclusionStudent radiographers identified key challenges which require consideration to ensure appropriate measures are in place to support their ongoing needs. Importantly PPE training is required before placement regardless of prior COVID-19 imaging experience.Implications for practiceAs the next academic year commences, the study findings identify important matters to be considered by education institutions with responsibility for Radiography training and as students commence clinical placements during the on-going global COVID-19 pandemic.     

Appropriateness of Computed Tomography and Ultrasound for Abdominal Complaints in the Emergency Department

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) examinations ordered in the emergency department (ED) for abdominal complaints.Materials and MethodsWe reviewed 154 CTs and 154 US orders for appropriateness using evidence-based recommendations by the American College of Radiology. The sample was powered to show a prevalence of inappropriate orders of 25% with a margin of error of 7.5%. Findings in the final reports were compared to the initial clinical diagnosis classified in 4 categories: normal, compatible with initial diagnosis, alternative diagnosis, and inconclusive. We also evaluated the frequency in which a second imaging modality was ordered on the same visit.ResultsA total of 135 CT and 143 US examinations had complete clinical information to allow evaluation of order appropriateness. The rate of inappropriate orders was 36.3% for CT and 84.4% for US. The final report of appropriate orders was significantly more likely to demonstrate findings compatible with the initial diagnosis for both CT (76.7% vs 20.4%, P < 0.0001) and US (38.9% vs 14.4%, P = 0.0093). Inappropriately ordered CT scans were more likely to show no abnormalities (46.9 vs 16.3%, P = 0.0001). An additional imaging order with a secondary modality was requested in 20% of the inappropriate US orders, and 8.2% of the inappropriate CT orders.ConclusionThe prevalence of inappropriate examinations in the ED was 36.3% for CT and 84.4% for US. Appropriately ordered exams were more likely to yield imaging findings compatible with the initial diagnosis for both modalities.     

Disproportionate Use in Minor Trauma Is Driving Emergency Department Cervical Spine Imaging: An Injury Severity Score–Based Analysis

PurposeClinical practice guidelines intended to reduce unnecessary cervical spine imaging have yielded mixed results. We aimed to assess evolving emergency department (ED) cervical spine imaging utilization in patients with trauma by injury severity.MethodsUsing 2009 to 2018 IBM MarketScan Commercial Databases, we identified ED trauma encounters, associated cervical spine imaging, and related diagnosis codes. We classified encounters by injury severity (minor, intermediate, major) using an International Classification of Disease code-derived Injury Severity Score algorithm and studied evolving imaging utilization using multivariable Poisson regression models.ResultsOf all 11,346,684 ED visits for trauma, 7,753,914 (68.3%), 3,524,250 (31.1%), and 68,520 (0.6%) involved minor, intermediate, and major injuries, respectively. Overall cervical spine imaging increased 5.7% annually (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.057, P < .001) with radiography decreasing 2.7% annually (IRR 0.973, P < .001) and CT increasing 10.5% annually (IRR 1.105, P < .001). Radiography utilization remained unchanged for minor injuries (IRR 0.994, P = .14) but decreased for intermediate (IRR 0.928 versus minor, P < .001) and major (IRR 0.931 versus minor, P < .001) injuries. Increases in CT utilization were greatest for minor injuries (IRR 1.109, P < .001) with smaller increases in intermediate (IRR 0.960 versus minor, P < .001) and major (IRR 0.987 versus minor, P = .022) injuries.ConclusionsRecent increases in cervical spine imaging in commercially insured patients with trauma seen in the ED have been largely related to increases in CT for patients with only minor injuries, in whom imaging utilization has been historically low. Further study is necessary to assess appropriateness, implications on costs and population radiation dose, and factors influencing ordering decision making.     

Epidemiology of male breast diseases: A 10-year institutional review

ObjectiveTo review breast imaging utilization and epidemiology of breast diseases in male patients referred to our breast center.Material and methodsA retrospective analysis of all male patients who underwent breast imaging at our institution over a 10 year period (03/14/2008 to 03/13/2018) was performed. Patient history, imaging findings, biopsy reports, surgical interventions and follow-up data were reviewed.ResultsOver the 10 year period, 143 male patients (0.1% of referred breast center patients) underwent breast imaging (versus 139,134 female patients). Mean age was 57.4 years (SD 19.7, median 59, range 21–92 years). The most common indication for referral was a palpable breast mass (98%). The most common diagnosis was gynecomastia (72%). Of the 20 (14%) patients who underwent core biopsy; 1 (0.7%) had breast cancer and the remaining 19 had benign pathologies. Follow-up imaging was recommended for 22 (15.4%) patients, of whom 15 (68%) were lost to follow-up. Two patients under the age of 25 years inadvertently underwent initial mammography instead of ultrasound.ConclusionThe epidemiology of breast diseases in our male patient population mirrors that of the general male population worldwide; with an overwhelming 99.3% cases falling into benign category. Two-thirds of our male patients for whom short interval follow up was recommended were lost to follow-up, signifying the need for a more proactive approach in ensuring their compliance. It is important to increase awareness among referring clinicians and general radiologists regarding male breast imaging recommendations so that the appropriate imaging study is performed.     

Chest CT imaging features and clinical outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A single-center case study in Ningbo,China

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the chest CT imaging features and clinical outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Ningbo, China.MethodsIn this retrospective study, twenty-eight confirmed and seven highly suspected cases of COVID-19 were enrolled in Ningbo first hospital from January 26, 2020 to March 5, 2020. Cases were confirmed by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The initial and follow-up chest CT imaging features, epidemiological history, and outcome were analyzed.ResultsThe average age of the patients was 57.3 ± 15.3 years (range: 27–96 years), including 25 females and 10 males. On CT images, 89.3% (25/28) confirmed and 100% (7/7) suspected patients had ground-glass opacities (GGOs), and GGOs with mixed consolidations were observed in 35.7% (10/28) confirmed and 42.9% (3/7) suspected cases, most of these lesions were distributed under the peripheral of both lungs. 17 confirmed and 4 suspected cases had a history of participating in Ningbo Tian-tong Temple rituals and all had GGOs in their lungs during the initial CT scan. As of March 25, 2020, the lung lesions of our cases were significantly resolved and all patients have been discharged from the hospital.ConclusionThe most common chest CT features are multiple bilateral and peripheral GGOs with mixed consolidations or not in the lungs of patients with COVID-19. Chest CT plays an important role in the diagnosis and monitoring treatment response of this disease. There was no reported death in our cases.     

Safe and rapid disposition of low-to-intermediate risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain: A 1-year high-volume single-center experience

BackgroundCoronary CT angiography (CTA) is a powerful tool for the evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED). Some debate persists regarding its cost-effectiveness in a low-to-intermediate risk population.ObjectiveThis study sought to evaluate the safety and cost-effectiveness of coronary CTA for low-to-intermediate risk patients presenting to the ED with chest pain in a closed-loop referral system.MethodsChest pain patients were evaluated in the ED via a local rapid coronary CTA protocol and tracked prospectively for ED throughput, disposition, chest pain recidivism, and cost utilization as compared with an age-matched cohort evaluated for chest pain treated with usual care.ResultsOne hundred eighty-three patients underwent the rapid coronary CTA protocol compared with an age-matched cohort of 184 patients treated with usual care. The median follow-up period for major adverse cardiovascular events in the coronary CTA group was 9.0 months (range, 1.8–14.5 months) and 11.1 months (range, 0–14.0 months) for the age-matched cohort. The median ED length of stay (LOS) was 5.8 hours (range, 2.6–12.3 hours) for the rapid coronary CTA cohort and 12.2 hours (range, 1.7–40.3 hours) for the age-matched cohort (P < .001). The median time to performance of coronary CTA was 2.5 hours (range, 0.4–8.7 hours) with a median time from coronary CTA performance to disposition of 2.9 hours (range, 0.8–8.6 hours). Total median hospital LOS was 5.9 hours (range, 2.7–124 hours) in the rapid coronary CTA cohort compared with 25.0 hours (range, 1.2–208 hours) in the age-matched cohort (P < .001). Hospital admission was more common in the age-matched cohort (98.9% vs 9.3%; P < .001). There was a significant reduction in total payer cost in coronary CTA group when compared to usual care ($182,064.55 vs $685,190.77; P < .001).ConclusionsCoronary CTA for ED risk stratification and disposition within a closed referral system resulted in the shortest ED LOS published to date while being safe and cost-effective.