ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Dyspnea-Suspected Cardiac Origin.

This article discusses imaging guidelines for five dyspnea variants: (1) dyspnea due to heart failure, ischemia not excluded; (2) dyspnea due to suspected nonischemic heart failure, ischemia excluded; (3) dyspnea due to suspected valvular heart disease, ischemia excluded; (4) dyspnea due to suspected cardiac arrhythmia, ischemia excluded; and (5) dyspnea due to suspected pericardial disease, ischemia excluded. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Chest Pain-Suspected Pulmonary Embolism.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a common and important clinical condition that cannot be accurately diagnosed on the basis of signs, symptoms, and history alone. The diagnosis of PE has been facilitated by technical advancements and multidetector CT pulmonary angiography, which is the major diagnostic modality currently used. Ventilation and perfusion scans remain largely accurate and useful in certain settings. Lower-extremity ultrasound can substitute by demonstrating deep vein thrombosis; however, if negative, further studies to exclude PE are indicated. In all cases, correlation with the clinical status, particularly with risk factors, improves not only the accuracy of diagnostic imaging but also overall utilization. Other diagnostic tests have limited roles. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Acute Nonspecific Chest Pain-Low Probability of Coronary Artery Disease.

Primary imaging options in patients at low risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) who present with undifferentiated chest pain and without signs of ischemia are functional testing with exercise or pharmacologic stress-based electrocardiography, echocardiography, or myocardial perfusion imaging to exclude myocardial ischemia after rule-out of myocardial infarction and early cardiac CT because of its high negative predictive value to exclude CAD. Although possible, is not conclusive whether triple-rule-out CT (CAD, pulmonary embolism, and aortic dissection) might improve the efficiency of patient management. More advanced noninvasive tests such as cardiac MRI and invasive imaging with transesophageal echocardiography or coronary angiography are rarely indicated. With increased likelihood of noncardiac causes, a number of diagnostic tests, among them ultrasound of the abdomen, MR angiography of the aorta with or without contrast, x-ray rib views, x-ray barium swallow, and upper gastrointestinal series, can also be appropriate. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. This recommendation is based on excellent evidence, including several randomized comparative effectiveness trials and blinded observational cohort studies.