Variation in Downstream Relative Costs Associated With Incidental Ovarian Cysts on Ultrasound

PurposeTo explore variation in downstream relative costs associated with ovarian cysts incidentally detected on ultrasound.MethodsFor 200 consecutive incidental ovarian cysts on ultrasound, ultrasound reports were classified in terms of presence of a radiologist recommendation for additional imaging. All downstream events (imaging, office visits, and surgery) associated with the cysts were identified from the electronic health record. Medical costs associated with these downstream events were estimated using national Medicare rates. Average cost per cyst was stratified by various factors; cost ratios were computed among subgroups.ResultsAverage costs per cyst were 1.9 times greater in postmenopausal than premenopausal women. Relative to when follow-up imaging was neither recommended nor obtained, costs were 1.1 times greater when follow-up imaging was recommended but not obtained, 5.1 times greater when follow-up imaging was both recommended and obtained, and 8.1 times greater when follow-up imaging was obtained despite not being recommended. Costs were 2.5 times greater when the radiologist underrecommended follow-up compared with Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) guidelines for management of ovarian cysts, 3.0 times greater when the ordering physician overmanaged compared with the radiologist’s recommendation, as well as 1.7 times and 3.8 times greater when the ordering physician undermanaged and overmanaged compared with SRU guidelines, respectively. Four ovarian neoplasms, although no ovarian malignancy, were diagnosed in the cohort.ConclusionFollow-up costs for incidental ovarian cysts are highly variable based on a range of factors. Radiologist recommendations may contribute to lower costs among patients receiving follow-up imaging. Such recommendations should reflect best practices and support the follow-up that will be of likely greatest value for patient care.     

Variation in Radiologists’ Follow-Up Imaging Recommendations for Small Cystic Pancreatic Lesions

ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the incidence, identify imaging and patient factors, and measure individual radiologist variation associated with follow-up recommendations for small focal cystic pancreatic lesions (FCPLs), a common incidental imaging finding.MethodsThis institutional review board–approved retrospective study analyzed 146,709 reports from abdominal CTs and MRIs performed in a large academic hospital from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. A trained natural language processing tool identified 4,345 reports with FCPLs, which were manually reviewed to identify those containing one or more <1.5-cm pancreatic cysts. For these patients, patient, lesion, and radiologist features and follow-up recommendations for FCPL were extracted. A nonlinear random-effects model estimated degree of variation in follow-up recommendations across radiologists at department and division levels.ResultsOf 2,872 reports with FCPLs < 1.5 cm, 708 (24.7%) had FCPL-related follow-up recommendations. Average patient age was 67 years (SD ± 11). In all, 1,721 (60.0%) reports were for female patients; 59.3% of patients had only one cyst. In multivariable analysis, older patients had slightly lower follow-up recommendation rates (odds ratio [OR]: 0.98 [0.98-1.00] per additional year), and lesions associated with main duct dilatation and septation were more likely to have a follow-up recommendation (ORs: 1.93 [1.11-3.36] and 2.88 [1.89-4.38], respectively). Radiologist years in practice (P = .51), trainee presence (P = .21), and radiologist gender (P = .52) were not associated with increased follow-up recommendations. There was significant interradiologist variation in the Abdominal Imaging Division (P = .04), but not in Emergency Radiology (P = .31) or Cancer Imaging Divisions (P = .29).DiscussionInterradiologist variation significantly contributes to variability in follow-up imaging recommendations for FCPLs.     

Correlation of the Strength of Recommendations for Additional Imaging to Adherence Rate and Diagnostic Yield

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the wording of radiologist recommendations for chest CT with the likelihood of recommendation adherence and the diagnostic yield of the recommended follow-up CT imaging.MethodsThis HIPAA-compliant retrospective study had institutional review board approval, including waiver of the requirement for patient consent. All outpatient chest radiographic (CXR) studies performed at a tertiary care academic medical center in 2008 (n = 29,138) were searched to identify examinations with recommendations for chest CT. The wording of chest CT recommendations was classified as conditional or absolute, on the basis of whether the recommendation stood independent of the clinical judgment of the ordering clinician. Using the radiology information system, patients who underwent chest CT within 90 days of the index CXR study containing the recommendation were determined, and the CT studies were evaluated to determine if there were abnormalities corresponding to the CXR abnormalities that prompted the recommendations. Corresponding abnormalities were categorized as clinically relevant or not, on the basis of whether further workup or treatment was warranted. Groups were compared using t tests and Fisher exact tests.ResultsRecommendations for chest CT appeared in 4.5% of outpatient CXR studies (1,316 of 29,138; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3%–4.8%); 39.4% (519 of 1,316; 95% CI, 36.8%–42.0%) were conditional and 60.6% (797 of 1,316; 95% CI, 58.0%–63.2%) were absolute. Patients with absolute recommendations were significantly more likely to undergo follow-up chest CT within 90 days than patients with conditional recommendations (67.8% vs 45.8%, respectively, P < .001). Despite this difference in provider adherence, there was no significant difference between the conditional and absolute recommendation groups with regard to the incidence of clinically relevant corresponding findings (P = .16) or malignancy (P = .08) on follow-up CT.ConclusionsConditional radiologist recommendations are associated with decreased provider adherence, though the likelihood of a clinically relevant finding on follow-up CT is no different than with absolute recommendations.     

Radiologist Point-of-Care Clinical Decision Support and Adherence to Guidelines for Incidental Lung Nodules

PurposeTo evaluate the effect of a workstation-integrated, point-of-care, clinical decision support (CDS) tool on radiologist adherence to radiology department guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on abdominal CT.MethodsThe CDS tool was developed to facilitate adherence to department guidelines for managing pulmonary nodules seen on abdominal CT. In October 2012, the tool was deployed within the radiology department of an academic medical center and could be used for a given abdominal CT at the discretion of the interpreting radiologist. We retrospectively identified consecutive patients who underwent abdominal CT (in the period from January 2012 to April 2013), had no comparison CT scans available, and were reported to have a solid, noncalcified, pulmonary nodule. Concordance between radiologist follow-up recommendation and department guidelines was compared among three groups: patients scanned before implementation of the CDS tool; and patients scanned after implementation, with versus without use of the tool.ResultsA total of 409 patients were identified, including 268 for the control group. Overall, guideline concordance was higher after CDS tool implementation (92 of 141 [65%] versus 133 of 268 [50%], P = .003). This finding was driven by the subset of post-CDS implementation cases in which the CDS tool was used (57 of 141 [40%]). In these cases, guideline concordance was significantly higher (54 of 57 [95%]), compared with post-implementation cases in which CDS was not used (38 of 84 [45%], P < .001), and to a control group of patients from before implementation (133 of 268 [50%]; P < .001).ConclusionsA point-of-care CDS tool was associated with improved adherence to guidelines for follow-up of incidental pulmonary nodules.     

Incidental findings in emergency imaging: frequency,recommendations, and compliance with consensus guidelines

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency of incidental findings (IFs) in emergency department (ED) imaging reports and evaluate the adherence of imaging recommendations to consensus societal guidelines for IFs. A retrospective review of consecutive ED computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) reports from two university-affiliated EDs over a 2-month period was performed. Each imaging report was reviewed in its entirety, and incidental findings were documented along with recommendations for additional imaging. Imaging recommendations were compared to published societal guidelines from the American College of Radiology (ACR) and Fleischner Society. Three thousand one hundred thirty-one total cases consisting of 1967 CTs and 1164 US contained 514 incidental findings (16.4 %), with 329 CT IFs (64 %) and 185 US IFs (36 %). The ovary was the most common organ for an IF (n?=?214, 42 %). Of all IFs, 347 (67.5 %) recommendations were concordant with societal guidelines and 167 (32.5 %) were discordant. 39.8 % of CT recommendations were discordant, while 19.5 % of US recommendations were discordant (p?<?0.0001). Incidental findings are commonly encountered in the emergent setting. Variable adherence to societal guidelines is noted. Targeted radiologist education and technological solutions may decrease rates of discordance.     

Does Direct Radiologist-Patient Verbal Communication Affect Follow-Up Compliance of Probably Benign Assessments?

PurposeThe aim of this study was to determine whether direct verbal communication of results by a radiologist affected follow-up compliance rates for probably benign breast imaging findings.MethodsThis study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. A retrospective search identified all patients from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 who had breast findings newly assessed as probably benign (BI-RADS category 3). Patients were categorized by whether the radiologist or the technologist verbally communicated the result and follow-up recommendation. Patient adherence to 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up imaging recommendations was recorded.ResultsCompliance data were available for 770 of 819 patients in the study. Overall compliance was 83.0% (639 of 770) for 6-month examinations, 68.1% (524 of 770) for 6- and 12-month examinations, and 57.4% (442 of 770) for 6-, 12-, and 24-month examinations. For patients who initially underwent diagnostic mammography alone, there was no significant difference in compliance between those who had and those who did not have radiologist-patient communication (6 months, 81.9% vs 80.8% [P = .83]; 6 and 12 months, 70.8% vs 67.3% [P = .58]; 6, 12, and 24 months, 54.2% vs 58.4% [P = .53]). For patients who initially underwent diagnostic mammography alone versus ultrasound with or without diagnostic mammography, there was no significant difference in compliance (6 months, 81.1% vs 84.3% [P = .24]; 6 and 12 months, 68.1% vs 68.0% [P = .96]; 6, 12, and 24 months, 57.4% vs 57.4% [P = .00]).ConclusionsHigh initial compliance was achieved by radiologist or technologist verbal communication of findings and recommendations. Direct communication by the radiologist did not increase compliance compared with communication by a technologist.     

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.     

Adherence to Radiology Recommendations in a Clinical CT Lung Screening Program

BackgroundAssess patient adherence to radiologist recommendations in a clinical CT lung cancer screening program.MethodsPatients undergoing CT lung cancer screening between January 12, 2012, and June 12, 2013, were included in this institutional review board–approved retrospective review. Patients referred from outside our institution were excluded. All patients met National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines Lung Cancer Screening high-risk criteria. Full-time program navigators used a CT lung screening program management system to schedule patient appointments, generate patient result notification letters detailing the radiologist follow-up recommendation, and track patient and referring physician notification of missed appointments at 30, 60, and 90 days. To be considered adherent, patients could be no more than 90 days past due for their next recommended examination as of September 12, 2014. Patients who died, were diagnosed with cancer, or otherwise became ineligible for screening were considered adherent. Adherence rates were assessed across multiple variables.ResultsDuring the study interval, 1,162 high-risk patients were screened, and 261 of 1,162 (22.5%) outside referrals were excluded. Of the remaining 901 patients, 503 (55.8%) were male, 414 (45.9%) were active smokers, 377 (41.8%) were aged 65 to 73, and >95% were white. Of the 901 patients, 772 (85.7%) were adherent. Most common reasons for nonadherence were patient refusal of follow-up exam (66.7%), inability to successfully contact the patient (20.9%), and inability to obtain the follow-up order from the referring provider (7.8%); 23 of 901 (2.6%) were discharged for other reasons.ConclusionsHigh rates of adherence to radiologist recommendations are achievable for in-network patients enrolled in a clinical CT lung screening program.     

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.     

Management of Incidental Adnexal Findings on CT and MRI: A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee (IFC) presents recommendations for managing adnexal masses incidentally detected on CT and MRI. These recommendations represent an update of those provided in our previous JACR 2013 white paper. The Adnexal Subcommittee, which included six radiologists with subspecialty expertise in abdominal imaging or ultrasound and one gynecologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by iterative consensus. Algorithm branches successively categorize adnexal masses based on patient characteristics (eg, pre- versus postmenopausal) and imaging features. They terminate with a management recommendation. The algorithm addresses most, but not all, pathologies and clinical scenarios. Our goal is to improve quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected adnexal masses.     

Management of Incidental Pituitary Findings on CT,MRI, and 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET: A White Paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee presents recommendations for managing pituitary findings that are incidentally detected on CT, MRI and ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. The Pituitary Subcommittee, which included radiologists practicing neuroradiology and an endocrinologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by informal iterative consensus. Algorithm branches successively categorize pituitary findings on the basis of imaging features. They terminate with an ascertainment of an indolent lesion (with sufficient confidence to discontinue follow-up) or a management recommendation. The algorithm addresses most, but not all, pathologies and clinical scenarios. The goal is to improve the quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected pituitary findings.     

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.     

Disparities Associated With Patient Adherence to BI-RADS 3 Assessment Follow-up Recommendations for Mammography and Ultrasound

ObjectiveTo assess the relationship between sociodemographic factors and adherence rates in patients with a BI-RADS 3 assessment.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study reviewed data from all patients with a BI-RADS 3 assessment on mammography and ultrasound examinations at a single, multisite academic institution, which serves a diverse urban-suburban population, from January 1, 2015, to December 13, 2017. Appropriate follow-up was defined as returning for the first follow-up examination 3 to 9 months after the index examination. Associations between BI-RADS 3 adherence rates and patient sociodemographic characteristics were evaluated using logistic regression.ResultsThere were 4,038 patients in our study period; 2,437 patients (60%) had appropriate follow-up, 765 (19%) patients had delayed follow-up, and 836 patients (21%) were lost to follow-up. The overall malignancy rate was 1.4% (46 of 3,202). Older age, retired employment status, and Medicare insurance status were associated with increased adherence to BI-RADS 3 follow-up recommendations. Black race, single relationship status, Medicaid and self-pay insurance status, and living in a top 15% disadvantaged zip code were associated with decreased adherence. On multivariate analysis, older age remained associated with increased adherence and Medicaid insurance status with decreased adherence. Time between index examination and cancer diagnosis was shorter in patients who had timely follow-up (202 days [interquartile range 183-358] versus 392 days [interquartile range 365-563], P ≤ .001), although there was not a significant difference in stage at diagnosis (P = .46).DiscussionMultiple sociodemographic factors are associated with low adherence to BI-RADS 3 follow-up recommendations suggesting that more frequent and targeted interventions are needed to close disparity gaps.     

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.     

Informed consent guidelines for ionising radiation examinations: A Delphi study

IntroductionInformed consent for ionising radiation medical imaging examinations is currently undertaken inconsistently in Australian radiographic practice. There is no uniform informed consent process, and opinions vary about how it should be undertaken, and by whom, if indeed it needs to be undertaken at all.To ensure that patients’ rights are maintained, the informed consent process must be consistent, proactive in the provision of information, and must empower the patient to formulate and ask questions about their care, and to make voluntary decisions.MethodsThe Delphi technique utilises a group of experts whose individual responses are used to create a collective consensus on a process. This ten-expert (five radiographer, five radiologist) Delphi study examined a basic modelling of the process of informed consent for ionising radiation medical imaging examinations and made recommendations for an ideal process.ResultsA series of consensus statements were developed, seeking to rectify areas of the process that were inconsistent, unclear, or ethically unsound. These statements were then considered alongside current codes of professional practice, and Australian law on the duty of disclosure. A model of the ideal process was then developed using these consensus statements and adhering to codes of practice.ConclusionThe final process model has a continuity of care and a continuity of information provision. The model eliminates the radiographer as a delegatee, and emphasises physician involvement. The referrer and the radiologist have a shared responsibility of providing risk disclosure information.Implications for Practice: For a non-pregnant adult, the ionising radiation dose from conventional radiography is considered insignificant, and does not require risk disclosure, ameliorating the time commitment needed for the process.     

Technology-Assisted Virtual Consultation for Medical Imaging

PurposeThe aim of this study was to report the investigators’ preliminary experience in the implementation of a “virtual consult” (VC) system enabling consultations between radiologists and referring physicians in physically remote locations throughout their enterprise.MethodsReferrers and radiologists directly access the VC through the electronic medical record and PACS, respectively. Referrers may click a VC link associated with any examination report to instant message the appropriate subspecialist radiologist, who receives an alert allowing automatic loading of the examination. The radiologist and referrer may then discuss the examination via instant messaging as well as launch a real-time screen-share of the radiologist’s PACS display, with the option for either participant to control the display. Radiologists’ and referrers’ feedback was evaluated after the institution’s first 110 VC sessions.ResultsReferrers’ most common specialties were emergency medicine (27.3%) and internal medicine (13.6%); radiologists’ most common subspecialties were abdominal (33.6%) and thoracic (16.4%) imaging. Screen-shares lasted on average 12 ± 16 minutes. From 80% to 90% of referrers agreed that the VC was easy to use, improved their understanding of the radiology report, affected patient management, and enhanced radiologists’ role. Referrers found the VC to be particularly useful when traditional consultation was difficult because of location or time constraints or when seeking a quick response to a targeted question. Radiologists recognized referrers’ positive response to the VC, although they tended to view the VC as disruptive to normal workflow.ConclusionsThe VC addresses a key challenge in the current era of digital radiology practice and provides added value to referrers, though continued radiologists’ workflow optimization is warranted.     

Follow-up Recommendation Rates Associated With Spectral Detector Dual-Energy CT of the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Retrospective Comparison to Single-Energy CT

BackgroundDual-energy CT image sets have many applications in abdominopelvic imaging but no demonstrated clinical effect.PurposeTo determine the effect of dual-energy CT iodine maps on abdominopelvic imaging follow-up recommendation rates.Materials and MethodsRetrospective study of abdominopelvic CTs acquired from April 2017 through June 2018. CT reports were analyzed for radiologic follow-up recommendation and follow-up recommendation reason. Follow-up MRI reports were analyzed for benign or nonbenign diagnosis. CT scans with iodine maps (CTIMs) and conventional CT scans (CCTs) subgroups were compared using χ² testing.ResultsIn all, 3,221 abdominopelvic CT scans of 2,401 patients (1,326 men, 1,075 women, mean age 54.1 years) were analyzed; 1,423 were CTIMs and 1,798 were CCTs. Follow-up recommendation rates were not significantly different for CTIMs and CCTs (19.5% and 21.4%, respectively, P = .19). Follow-up recommendations because of incomplete diagnosis were significantly lower in CTIMs (9.1%) than in CCTs (11.9%, P = .01). Follow-up recommendations for MRI and PET/CT were significantly lower in CTIMs (9.6%) than CCTs (13.0%, P = .003). Follow-up MRI outcomes (n = 111) were not different between CTIMs (61.2% benign) and CCTs (59.6%, P = .87).ConclusionDual-energy CT iodine maps are associated with decreased follow-up examinations because of incomplete diagnosis and decreased recommendations for follow-up MRI, suggesting that abdominopelvic iodine maps may benefit patient care and decrease institutional cost.     

Liver Tumor Ablation Procedure Duration and Estimated Patient Radiation Dose: Comparing Positron Emission Tomography/CT and CT Guidance

PurposeTo compare procedure duration and patient radiation dose in positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and CT-guided liver tumor ablation procedures.Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective, case-control study, 275 patients underwent 368 image-guided ablation procedures to treat 537 tumors. Radiologists used PET/CT guidance for 117 procedures and CT guidance for 251 procedures. PET/CT-guided procedures were performed by one radiologist (C: P.B.S.). All 3 radiologists (A: J.G.S., B: a radiologist who is not an author on this article, and C: P.B.S.) performed CT-guided procedures. Potential confounders included patient demographics, clinical and tumor characteristics, and procedural variables.ResultsThe mean duration and estimated patient radiation dose of PET/CT-guided procedures performed by radiologist C were 21.5 ± 4.9 minutes longer and 0.7 ± 2.8 mSv higher than CT-guided procedures performed by all radiologists in an unadjusted comparison. Adjusting for confounding, mean duration and estimated dose of PET/CT-guided procedures performed by radiologist C were 28.3 ± 3.8 minutes longer (P < .0001) and 6.2 ± 2.9 mSv higher (P = .03) than CT-guided procedures performed by the same radiologist. Comparing CT-guided procedures performed by all 3 radiologists, adjusted mean durations and estimated patient doses of procedures by the least experienced radiologist, radiologist A, and the second most experienced radiologist, radiologist B, were 24.2 ± 5.1 (P < .0001) and 18.1 ± 8.9 (P = .04) minutes longer and 13.1 ± 3.7 (P < .001) and 14.5 ± 6.4 (P = .02) mSv higher, respectively, than procedures performed by the most experienced radiologist, radiologist C.ConclusionsPET/CT-guided liver ablations had a slightly longer duration with slightly higher estimated patient radiation dose than similar CT-guided liver ablations. Procedure duration and patient dose do not appear to be major impediments to the emerging field of PET/CT-guided tumor ablation.     

Optimizing patient care in radiology through team-working: A case study from the United Kingdom

ObjectivesTo investigate how changes in service delivery within the radiology department of an acute district general hospital optimized imaging services for patients and referrers through a strong emphasis on team-working.MethodsData related to service delivery was collected for three consecutive years and interrogated by imaging modality and reporting practitioner (radiologist, reporting radiographer, sonographer) to explore how workload had changed over the cycle.ResultsDepartmental activity demonstrated consistent increases, both overall (13.3%) and for most modalities (MRI 43.7%, CT 22.8%) for the study period (March 2010–March 2013). Overall trend suggested significantly shorter waiting times (CT 0.7 weeks, MRI 1.3 weeks, non-obstetric ultrasound one week; all modalities p = 0.001). Some modality variation in reporting times was apparent, with CT (p = 0.06) and MRI (p = 0.01) decreasing but there was an increase in X-ray reporting times (p = 0.001). Reporting radiographers and sonographers reported the majority of X-ray and non-obstetric ultrasound interpretations (59% and 52%, respectively). A radiographer-led neonatal reporting service was implemented and the urology patient pathway redesigned. Effective team-working produced savings of three full-time consultant radiologist posts.ConclusionRadiologists and radiographers, working together, can deliver an effective service. Innovation, staff development and redesign of patient pathways, have produced significant improvements.     

Incidental pulmonary embolism in CT scans of oncological patients with metastatic disease undergoing clinical trials: frequency and linkage with onset of disease progression (PE-PD association)

Objectives:We aimed to analyze the association between the onsets of PE and of progressive disease (PD) in CT scans of oncological patients undergoing clinical trials.Methods:We retrospectively searched our oncological clinical trials database (1/2012 - 6/2017). We retrieved patients who underwent protocol baseline and follow-up CT scans. RECIST 1.1 categories of response were calculated for each scan at interpretation. The entire dataset was searched for reports with incidental PE.For patients with incidental PE, we collected all the scans conducted up to and including the scan with PE. For each scan, we retrieved the recorded RECIST 1.1 category. We excluded patients with PE at baseline.The frequency of incidental PE in oncological clinical trial patients was calculated. For patients with incidental PE, we evaluated the association between PE and PD.Results:During the study period, 1,070 patients underwent 3,818 CTs. The total number of follow-up months was 7,292 months. 18 patients developed incidental PE during follow-up. Thus, the frequency of incidental PE in oncological clinical trial patients was 3% per year of follow-up. Patients with incidental PE underwent 60 scans up to development of PE. Of 42 non-baseline scans, 6/6 (100%) PD showed PE, and 5/36 (13.9%) non-PD showed PE, making PE onset associated with PD onset (p < 0.001).Conclusion:In oncological clinical trials, the frequency of incidental PE is 3% per year of follow-up. The onset of incidental PE is linked to the onset of PD.Advances in knowledge:Incidental PE is associated with the onset of disease progression. Radiologists interpret oncological scans should be aware of the association between PE and PD.