Renal mass imaging modalities: does body mass index (BMI) matter?

PURPOSE: Accurate measurement of renal mass size is crucial in the management of renal cancer. With the burdensome cost of imaging yet its need for management, a better understanding of the variability among patients when determining mass size remains of urgent importance. Current guidelines on optimal imaging are limited, especially with respect to body mass index (BMI). The aim of this study is to discern which modalities accurately measure renal mass size and whether BMI influences such accuracy. METHODS: A multi-institutional chart review was performed for adult patients undergoing partial or radical nephrectomy between 2018 and 2021, with 236 patients ultimately included. Patients were categorized by BMI (BMI 1: 18.5-24.9, BMI 2: 25-29.9, BMI 3: 30-34.9, and BMI 4: ≥ 35). The greatest mass lengths were compared between the pathology report and the following: computerized tomography (CT), renal ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: The difference between greatest length on CT with contrast and MRI were significantly different when compared to pathologic measurement. BMI groups 3 and 4 were found to have a significant difference in size estimates compared to BMI 2 for CT with contrast. No difference was found between size estimates by BMI group for any other imaging modality. CONCLUSION: CT with contrast becomes less accurate at estimating mass size for patients with BMI > 30. While contrast-enhanced CT remains a vital imaging modality for tissue enhancement in the context of unknown renal masses, caution must be used for mass size estimation in the obese population.

Evaluating Diagnostic Accuracy and Inter-reader Agreement of the Prostate Imaging After Focal Ablation Scoring System.

Background and objective: Focal therapy (FT) is increasingly recognized as a promising approach for managing localized prostate cancer (PCa), notably reducing treatment-related morbidities. However, post-treatment anatomical changes present significant challenges for surveillance using current imaging techniques. This study aimed to evaluate the inter-reader agreement and efficacy of the Prostate Imaging after Focal Ablation (PI-FAB) scoring system in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) on post-FT multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted involving patients who underwent primary FT for localized csPCa between 2013 and 2023, followed by post-FT mpMRI and a prostate biopsy. Two expert genitourinary radiologists retrospectively evaluated post-FT mpMRI using PI-FAB. The key measures included inter-reader agreement of PI-FAB scores, assessed by quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa (κ), and the system's efficacy in predicting in-field recurrence of csPCa, with a PI-FAB score cutoff of 3. Additional diagnostic metrics including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy were also evaluated. Key findings and limitations: Scans from 38 patients were analyzed, revealing a moderate level of agreement in PI-FAB scoring (κ = 0.56). Both radiologists achieved sensitivity of 93% in detecting csPCa, although specificity, PPVs, NPVs, and accuracy varied. Conclusions and clinical implications: The PI-FAB scoring system exhibited high sensitivity with moderate inter-reader agreement in detecting in-field recurrence of csPCa. Despite promising results, its low specificity and PPV necessitate further refinement. These findings underscore the need for larger studies to validate the clinical utility of PI-FAB, potentially aiding in standardizing post-treatment surveillance. Patient summary: Focal therapy has emerged as a promising approach for managing localized prostate cancer, but limitations in current imaging techniques present significant challenges for post-treatment surveillance. The Prostate Imaging after Focal Ablation (PI-FAB) scoring system showed high sensitivity for detecting in-field recurrence of clinically significant prostate cancer. However, its low specificity and positive predictive value necessitate further refinement. Larger, more comprehensive studies are needed to fully validate its clinical utility.

Does the osteopathic pedal pump reduce lower limb volume in healthy subjects?

CONTEXT: Lymphatic treatments are gentle and passive techniques believed to enhance movement of lymph back into the central circulatory system. Animal studies provide supportive evidence, yet there are few studies in humans. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to investigate whether the osteopathic pedal pump protocol reduces volume in the lower limbs of healthy subjects. METHODS: A total of 30 first- and second-year medical students were recruited. Subjects were excluded from participating if they had acute asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), congestive heart failure, active infections, fractures of the lower extremities, or metastatic cancer. A within-subjects study design with pre- and posttreatment measurement of lower limb volume was utilized. Pretreatment lower limb volume measurements were obtained utilizing a volumetric water gauge prior to myofascial thoracic inlet release and a 5 min pedal lymphatic pump protocol treatment. Posttreatment lower limb measurements were taken immediately following the protocol treatment. A telephone interview was conducted 2-3 days after the treatment to assess the participants' experience of the treatment and whether the treatment elicited a subjective change from baseline. A paired t test was utilized to determine the statistical significance of volume displacement posttreatment. RESULTS: The mean change of pretreatment to posttreatment lower limb volume was -45.63 mL with a standard deviation of 37.65 mL. The change between the pretreatment and posttreatment volume measurements was statistically significant (p<0.001). The minimum displacement was +19 mL, and the maximum displacement was -167 mL. The majority of participants perceived the treatment as effective and enjoyable, were likely to recommend it to others, and were willing to have it performed on them at routine office visits if there was a need. CONCLUSIONS: The osteopathic pedal pump technique, when utilized on those without leg lymphedema, reduces lower limb volume as measured by the volumetric water gauge. Further studies are warranted, especially in persons with excess lower-extremity edema, lymphedema or venous stasis.