Is work overload associated with diagnostic errors on 18F-FDG-PET/CT?

PURPOSE: To determine the association between workload and diagnostic errors on 18F-FDG-PET/CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 103 18F-FDG-PET/CT scans with a diagnostic error that was corrected with an addendum between March 2018 and July 2023. All scans were performed at a tertiary care center. The workload of each nuclear medicine physician or radiologist who authorized the 18F-FDG-PET/CT report was determined on the day the diagnostic error was made and normalized for his or her own average daily production (workloadnormalized). A workloadnormalized of more than 100% indicates that the nuclear medicine physician or radiologist had a relative work overload, while a value of less than 100% indicates a relative work underload on the day the diagnostic error was made. The time of the day the diagnostic error was made was also recorded. Workloadnormalized was compared to 100% using a signed rank sum test, with the hypothesis that it would significantly exceed 100%. A Mann-Kendall test was performed to test the hypothesis that diagnostic errors would increase over the course of the day. RESULTS: Workloadnormalized (median of 121%, interquartile range: 71 to 146%) on the days the diagnostic errors were made was significantly higher than 100% (P = 0.014). There was no significant upward trend in the frequency of diagnostic errors over the course of the day (Mann-Kendall tau = 0.05, P = 0.7294). CONCLUSION: Work overload seems to be associated with diagnostic errors on 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Diagnostic errors were encountered throughout the entire working day, without any upward trend towards the end of the day.

What is the added value of specialist radiology review of multidisciplinary team meeting cases in a tertiary care center?

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are an important component of the workload of radiologists. This study investigated how often subspecialized radiologists change patient management in MDTMs at a tertiary care institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over 2 years, six subspecialty radiologists documented their contributions to MDTMs at a tertiary care center. Both in-house and external imaging examinations were discussed at the MDTMs. All imaging examinations (whether primary or second opinion) were interpreted and reported by subspecialty radiologist prior to the MDTMs. The management change ratio (MCratio) of the radiologist was defined as the number of cases in which the radiologist's input in the MDTM changed patient management beyond the information that was already provided by the in-house (primary or second opinion) radiology report, as a proportion of the total number of cases whose imaging examinations were prepared for demonstration in the MDTM. RESULTS: Sixty-eight MDTMs were included. The time required for preparing and attending all MDTMs (excluding imaging examinations that had not been reported yet) was 11,000 min, with a median of 172 min (IQR 113-200 min) per MDTM, and a median of 9 min (IQR 8-13 min) per patient. The radiologists' input changed patient management in 113 out of 1138 cases, corresponding to an MCratio of 8.4%. The median MCratio per MDTM was 6% (IQR 0-17%). CONCLUSION: Radiologists' time investment in MDTMs is considerable relative to the small proportion of cases in which they influence patient management in the MDTM. The use of radiologists for MDTMs should therefore be improved. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The use of radiologists for MDTMs (multidisciplinary team meetings) should be improved, because their time investment in MDTMs is considerable relative to the small proportion of cases in which they influence patient management in the MDTM. KEY POINTS: • Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are an important component of the workload of radiologists. • In a tertiary care center in which all imaging examinations have already been interpreted and reported by subspecialized radiologists before the MDTM takes place, the median time investment of a radiologist for preparing and demonstrating one MDTM patient is 9 min. • In this setting, the radiologist changes patient management in only a minority of cases in the MDTM.

Did medical doctors who order abdominal CT scans during on-call hours truly become worse at clinical reasoning? Yes, they did.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate temporal changes in clinical reasoning quality of physicians who requested abdominal CT scans at a tertiary care center during on-call hours within a 15-year period. METHODS: This retrospective study included 531 patients who underwent abdominal CT at a tertiary care center during on-call hours on 36 randomly sampled unique calendar days in each of the years between 2005 and 2019. Clinical reasoning quality was expressed as a percentage (0-100%), taking into account the degree by which the differential diagnoses on the CT request form matched the CT diagnosis. Temporal changes in the quality of clinical reasoning and number of CT scans were assessed using Mann-Kendall tests. Associations between the quality of clinical reasoning with patient age and gender, requesting department, and time of CT scanning were determined with linear regression analyses. RESULTS: The median annual clinical reasoning score was 0.4% (interquartile range: 0.3 to 0.6%; range: 0.1 to 1.9%). The quality of clinical reasoning significantly decreased between 2005 and 2019 (Mann-Kendall Tau of -0.829, p < 0.001), while the number of abdominal CT scans significantly increased (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.790, p < 0.001). There was a significant association between the quality of clinical reasoning and patient age (ß coefficient of 0.210, p = 0.002). The quality of clinical reasoning was not significantly associated with patient gender, requesting department, or time of CT scanning. CONCLUSION: The clinical reasoning quality of physicians who request abdominal CT scans during on-call hours has deteriorated over time. Clinical reasoning appears to be worse in younger patients. KEY POINTS: • In patients with suspected acute abdominal pathology who are scheduled to undergo CT scanning, referring physicians generally have difficulties in making an accurate pretest (differential) diagnosis. • Clinical reasoning quality of physicians who request acute abdominal CT scans has deteriorated over the years, while the number of CT scans has shown a significant increase. • Clinical reasoning quality appears to be worse in younger patients in this setting.

A new medical imaging postprocessing and interpretation concept to investigate the clinical relevance of incidentalomas: can we keep Pandora's box closed?

BACKGROUND: Incidental imaging findings (incidentalomas) are common, but there is currently no effective means to investigate their clinical relevance. PURPOSE: To introduce a new concept to postprocess a medical imaging examination in a way that incidentalomas are concealed while its diagnostic potential is maintained to answer the referring physician's clinical questions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A deep learning algorithm was developed to automatically eliminate liver, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen, adrenal glands, lungs, and bone from unenhanced computed tomography (CT). This deep learning algorithm was applied to a separately held set of unenhanced CT scans of 27 patients who underwent CT to evaluate for urolithiasis, and who had a total of 32 incidentalomas in one of the aforementioned organs. RESULTS: Median visual scores for organ elimination on modified CT were 100% for the liver, gallbladder, spleen, and right adrenal gland, 90%-99% for the pancreas, lungs, and bones, and 80%-89% for the left adrenal gland. In 26 out of 27 cases (96.3%), the renal calyces and pelves, ureters, and urinary bladder were completely visible on modified CT. In one case, a short (<1 cm) trajectory of the left ureter was not clearly visible due to adjacent atherosclerosis that was mistaken for bone by the algorithm. Of 32 incidentalomas, 28 (87.5%) were completely concealed on modified CT. CONCLUSION: This preliminary technical report demonstrated the feasibility of a new approach to postprocess and evaluate medical imaging examinations that can be used by future prospective research studies with long-term follow-up to investigate the clinical relevance of incidentalomas.

Value-based radiology cannot thrive without reforms and research.

KEY POINTS: • A value-based system aims to achieve improved patient-relevant outcomes without increasing costs.• Value-based radiology cannot thrive as long as volume dominates as the most important metric to reward clinical performance.• Reforms and research are needed to enable radiologists to practice value-based healthcare.

Radiologist-patient communication of musculoskeletal ultrasonography results: a choice between added value and costs.

BACKGROUND: Literature on radiologist-patient communication of musculoskeletal ultrasonography (US) results is currently lacking. PURPOSE: To investigate the patient's view on receiving the results from a radiologist after a musculoskeletal US examination, and the additional time required to provide such a service. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study included 106 outpatients who underwent musculoskeletal US, and who were equally randomized to either receive or not receive the results from the radiologist directly after the examination. RESULTS: In both randomization groups, all quality performance metrics (radiologist's friendliness, explanation, skill, concern for comfort, concern for patient questions/worries, overall rating of the examination, and likelihood of recommending the examination) received median scores of good/high to very good/very high. Patients who had received their US results from the radiologist rated the radiologist's explanation and concern for patient questions/worries as significantly higher (P = 0.009 and P = 0.002) than patients who had not. In both randomization groups, there were no significant differences between anxiety levels before and after the US examination (P = 0.222 and P = 1.000). Of the 48 responding patients, 46 (95.8%) rated a radiologist-patient discussion of US findings as important. US examinations with a radiologist-patient communication regarding US findings (median = 11.29 min) were significantly longer (P < 0.0001) than those without (median = 8.08 min). CONCLUSION: Even without communicating musculoskeletal US results directly to patients, radiologists can still achieve high ratings from patients for their communication and empathy. Nevertheless, patient experience can be further enhanced if a radiologist adds this communication to the examination. However, this increases total examination time and therefore costs.

Patient safety incidents in radiology: frequency and distribution of incident types.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety incidents may be a valuable source of information to learn from and to prevent future errors. PURPOSE: To determine the distribution of patient safety incident types in radiology according to the International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS), and to comprehensively review those incidents that were either harmful or serious in terms of risk of patient harm and reoccurrence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The most recent five-year database (2014-2019) of a radiology incident reporting system was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 480 patient safety incidents were included. Top three ICPS incident types were clinical administration (119/480, 24.8%), resources/organizational management (112/480, 23.3%), and clinical process/procedure (91/480, 19.0%). Harm severities were none in 457 (95.2%) cases, mild in 14 (2.9%), moderate in 4 (0.8%), severe in 3 (0.6%), and unknown in one case. Subsequent Prevention Recovery Information System for Monitoring and Analysis (PRISMA) reviews were performed in 4 (0.8%) cases. The three patient safety incidents that caused severe harm (of which one underwent PRISMA review) involved resources/organizational management (n = 1), clinical process/procedure (n = 1), and medication/IV fluids (n = 1). Three other cases (with no harm in two cases and moderate harm in one case) that underwent PRISMA review involved resources/organizational management (n = 2) and medical device/equipment/property (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Radiology-related patient safety incidents predominantly occur in three ICPS domains (clinical administration, resources/organizational management, and clinical process/procedure). Harmful/serious incidents are relatively rare. The standardly and transparently reported findings from this study may be used for healthcare quality improvement, benchmarking purposes, and as a primer for future studies.

MRI after Whoops procedure: diagnostic value for residual sarcoma and predictive value for an incomplete second resection.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of MRI for the detection and assessment of the anatomic extent of residual sarcoma after a Whoops procedure (unplanned sarcoma resection) and its utility for the prediction of an incomplete second resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included consecutive patients who underwent a Whoops procedure, successively followed by gadolinium chelate-enhanced MRI and second surgery at a tertiary care sarcoma center. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included, of whom 19 with residual tumor at the second surgery and 8 with an incomplete second resection (R1: n = 6 and R2: n = 2). Interobserver agreement for residual tumor at MRI after a Whoops procedure was perfect (κ value: 1.000). MRI achieved a sensitivity of 47.4% (9/19), a specificity of 100% (7/7), a positive predictive value of 100% (9/9), and a negative predictive value of 70.0% (7/17) for the detection of residual tumor. MRI correctly classified 2 of 19 residual sarcomas as deep-seated (i.e., extending beyond the superficial muscle fascia) but failed to correctly classify 3 of 19 residual sarcomas as deep-seated. There were no significant associations between MRI findings (presence of residual tumor, maximum tumor diameter, anatomic tumor extent, tumor margins, tumor spiculae, and tumor tail on the superficial fascia) with an incomplete (R1 or R2) second resection. CONCLUSION: Gadolinium chelate-enhanced MRI is a reproducible method to rule in residual sarcoma, but it is insufficiently accurate to rule out and assess the anatomic extent or residual sarcoma after a Whoops procedure. Furthermore, MRI has no utility in predicting an incomplete second resection.

Diagnostic value of MRI signs in differentiating Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis.

BACKGROUND: The value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signs in differentiating Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis has not be thoroughly investigated. PURPOSE: To investigate the value of various MRI signs in differentiating Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-one patients who underwent MRI because of a bone lesion of unknown nature with a differential diagnosis that included both Ewing sarcoma and osteomyelitis were included. Two observers assessed several MRI signs, including the transition zone of the bone lesion, the presence of a soft-tissue mass, intramedullary and extramedullary fat globules, and the penumbra sign. RESULTS: Diagnostic accuracies for discriminating Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis were 82.4% and 79.4% for the presence of a soft-tissue mass, and 64.7% and 58.8% for a sharp transition zone of the bone lesion, for readers 1 and 2 respectively. Inter-observer agreement with regard to the presence of a soft-tissue mass and the transition zone of the bone lesion were moderate (κ = 0.470) and fair (κ = 0.307), respectively. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the diameter of the soft-tissue mass (if present) were 0.829 and 0.833, for readers 1 and 2 respectively. Mean inter-observer difference in soft-tissue mass diameter measurement ± limits of agreement was 35.0 ± 75.0 mm. Diagnostic accuracies of all other MRI signs were all < 50%. CONCLUSION: Presence and size of a soft-tissue mass, and sharpness of the transition zone, are useful MRI signs to differentiate Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis, but inter-observer agreement is relatively low. Other MRI signs are of no value in this setting.

JOURNAL CLUB: CT-Guided Bone Biopsies With Indeterminate Results in Pediatric Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine the frequency of indeterminate percutaneous CT-guided bone biopsy results in a pediatric population, the subsequent management of indeterminate biopsy results, and the factors associated with an indeterminate biopsy result. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 86 pediatric patients who underwent 89 CT-guided biopsies because of an unclear bone lesion in a tertiary referral center for bone tumors. RESULTS: CT-guided bone biopsy results were indeterminate in 29 of 89 lesions (32.6%; 95% CI, 23.7-42.9%). Excluding two bone lesions with an uncertain diagnosis, all other 27 bone lesions proved to be benign on follow-up (0% malignancies; 95% CI, 0-12.5%). Compared with patients with diagnostic CT-guided bone biopsy results, patients with indeterminate biopsy results were significantly younger (median age, 14.0 vs 18.0 years; p = 0.0185), were female more frequently (72.4% vs 41.7%, p = 0.0007), and had bone lesion-related symptoms less frequently (62.1% vs 88.3%, p = 0.0094). Furthermore, bone lesions with indeterminate CT-guided bone biopsy results were significantly more frequently not visible at CT (24.1% vs 1.7%, p = 0.0021), more frequently had a sclerotic rim (40.9% vs 18.6%, p = 0.0477), less frequently showed cortical destruction (45.5% vs 72.9%, p = 0.0343), less frequently had an associated extraosseous soft-tissue mass (4.5% vs 32.2%, p = 0.0094), and were smaller (median diameter, 17.0 vs 31.0 mm; p = 0.0007) than bone lesions with diagnostic results; in addition, the maximum biopsy sample length was significantly shorter for bone lesions with indeterminate CT-guided bone biopsy results than for those with diagnostic results (mean length, 10.9 vs 17.8 mm; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: A nondiagnostic CT-guided biopsy result in a child with an unclear bone lesion suggests benignity. Several clinical and CT features of bone lesions are associated with indeterminate CT-guided bone biopsy results.

Primary tumor volume measurements in Ewing sarcoma: MRI inter- and intraobserver variability and comparison with FDG-PET.

BACKGROUND: Primary tumor volume is as an important and independent prognostic factor in Ewing sarcoma. However, the observer variability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based primary tumor volume measurements in newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma has never been investigated. Furthermore, it is unclear how MRI-based volume measurements compare to 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-based volume measurements. This study aimed to determine the observer variability of simplified MRI-based primary tumor volume measurements in newly diagnosed treatment-naive Ewing sarcoma and to compare them to the actual primary tumor volume at MRI and the FDG-PET-based metabolically active tumor volume (MATV). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-nine newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma patients with pretreatment MRI (of whom 11 also underwent FDG-PET) were included. Both exact and dichotomized (according to the proposed threshold of 200 mL) primary tumor volume measurements were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean inter- and intraobserver differences of MRI-based simplified tumor volume ± limits of agreement varied between 15-42 ± 155-204 mL and between 9-16 ± 64-250 mL, respectively. Inter- and intraobserver agreements of dichotomized MRI-based simplified tumor volume measurements was very good (κ = 0.827-1.000). Mean difference between simplified and actual tumor volumes at MRI ± limits of agreement was 60 ± 381 mL. Agreement between dichotomized simplified and actual tumor volumes at MRI was very good (κ = 0.839). Mean difference between MRI-based simplified tumor volume and MATV ± limits of agreement was 181 ± 549 mL and almost significantly different (p = .0581). Agreement between dichotomized MRI-based simplified tumor volume and MATV was moderate (κ = 0.560). CONCLUSIONS: Exact MRI-based simplified primary tumor volume measurements in Ewing sarcoma suffer from considerable observer variability, but observer agreement of dichotomized measurements (≤200 mL vs. >200 mL) is very good and generally matches MRI-based actual volume measurements. MRI-based primary tumor volume measurements poorly-moderately agree with and tend to be higher than the MATV.

Can FDG-PET/CT replace blind bone marrow biopsy of the posterior iliac crest in Ewing sarcoma?

OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) to blind bone marrow biopsy (BMB) of the posterior iliac crest in detecting metastatic bone marrow involvement in newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 20 patients with newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma who underwent pretreatment FDG-PET/CT and a total of 38 blind BMBs (two unilateral and 18 bilateral) of the posterior iliac crest. FDG-PET/CT scans were evaluated for bone marrow involvement, both in the posterior iliac crest and other sites, and compared to blind BMB results. RESULTS: FDG-PET/CT was positive for bone marrow involvement in 7/38 posterior iliac crests, whereas BMB was positive in 5/38 posterior iliac crests. FDG-PET/CT and BMB results in the posterior iliac crest agreed in 36/38 cases (94.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.7-98.5%). On a patient level, FDG-PET/CT was positive for bone marrow involvement in 4/20 patients, whereas BMB of the posterior iliac crest was positive in 3/20 patients. On a patient level, FDG-PET/CT and BMB results agreed in 19/20 patients (95.0%, 95% CI: 76.4-99.1%). The only discrepancies between FDG-PET/CT and BMB were observed in two BMBs of one patient. Both BMBs in this patient were negative, whereas FDG-PET/CT indicated bilateral posterior iliac crest involvement and also extensive bone marrow involvement elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET/CT appears to be a valuable method for metastatic bone marrow assessment in newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma. The routine use of blind BMB of the posterior iliac crest should be reconsidered when FDG-PET/CT is available.

Culture yield of repeat percutaneous image-guided biopsy after a negative initial biopsy in suspected spondylodiscitis: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the published data on the culture yield of a repeat (second) percutaneous image-guided biopsy after negative initial biopsy in suspected spondylodiscitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed of the PubMed/Medline and Embase databases. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed. The proportions of positive cultures among all initial biopsies and second biopsies (after a negative initial biopsy) were calculated for each study and assessed for heterogeneity (defined as I2 > 50%). RESULTS: Eight studies, comprising a total of 107 patients who underwent a second percutaneous image-guided biopsy after a culture-negative initial biopsy in suspected spondylodiscitis, were included. All eight studies were at risk of bias and were concerning with regard to applicability, particularly patient selection, flow of patients through the study, and timing of the biopsy. The proportions of positive cultures among all initial biopsies ranged from 10.3 to 52.5%, and were subject to heterogeneity (I2 = 73.7%). The proportions of positive cultures among all second biopsies after negative initial biopsy ranged from 0 to 60.0%, and were not subject to heterogeneity (I2 = 38.7%). CONCLUSION: Although a second percutaneous image-guided biopsy may have some value in patients with suspected spondylodiscitis, its exact value remains unclear, given the available poor-quality evidence. Future well-designed studies are needed to determine the role of a second percutaneous image-guided biopsy in this setting. Such studies should clearly describe the spectrum of patients that was selected for a second percutaneous image-guided biopsy, the method of biopsy, and differences compared with the first biopsy, if any.

CT-guided biopsy in suspected spondylodiscitis: microbiological yield, impact on antimicrobial treatment, and relationship with outcome.

PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical impact of CT-guided biopsy, as performed in routine clinical practice, in patients with suspected spondylodiscitis on MRI in terms of culture yield, impact on antimicrobial treatment, and outcome. METHODS: This study included 64 patients with MRI findings compatible with spondylodiscitis who underwent CT-guided biopsy. RESULTS: Initial CT-guided biopsies were culture-positive in 20/64 (31.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 21.2-43.3%). Repeat CT-guided biopsies (after initial negative biopsy) were culture-positive in an additional 5/15 (33.3%, 95% CI 15.2-58.3%). Serum leukocytes, C-reactive protein, pre-biopsy use of antibiotics, neurological symptoms, MRI findings, vertebral height loss, and hyperkyphosis were not significantly different between culture-positive and culture-negative cases (P = 0.214-1.000); 75% (15/20) of initial CT-guided biopsies that were culture-positive provided additional information to clinicians for guiding antibiotic treatment. Sixty-two of 64 patients (96.9%, 95% CI 89.3-99.1%) would have been adequately treated if a strategy was followed that would subject all patients without clinical findings suspicious for "atypical" microorganisms and negative blood cultures to empirical antibiotics (i.e., clindamycin for coverage of Gram-positive bacteria) without using biopsy results to determine the optimal antibiotic regimen. Outcome within 6 months (development of neurologic or orthopedic complications, surgery, and death) was not significantly different (P = 0.751) between culture-positive and culture-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although CT-guided biopsies are culture-positive in a minority of cases, the majority of positive cultures are useful to tailor antibiotic treatment. Empirical treatment with clindamycin may cover almost all micro-organisms in positive biopsy specimens, provided patients are not immunocompromised. Outcome appears similar between culture-positive and culture-negative patients.

Surveillance MRI for the detection of locally recurrent Ewing sarcoma seems futile.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of locally recurrent Ewing sarcoma on surveillance MRI and the outcome of these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included all patients with newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma who underwent surveillance MRI of the primary tumor location after primary treatment between 1997 and 2016. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients underwent a total of 176 local surveillance MRI scans, yielding an average of 5.5 ± 4.4 MRI scans per patient. Follow-up time of surveillance MRI after completion of primary treatment ranged between 1 and 111 months. Surveillance MRI detected five (15.6%) locally recurrent Ewing sarcomas, at 2, 4, 6, 6, and 7 months after completion of primary treatment, of whom three also had simultaneous recurrent (metastatic) disease elsewhere. Two patients had recurrent metastatic disease without any signs of locally recurrent disease on surveillance MRI. All five patients with locally recurrent disease on surveillance MRI died, at 2, 4, 5, 8, and 9 months after local recurrence detection. Patients with locally recurrent disease had a significantly worse overall survival than patients without locally recurrent disease (log-rank test, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A limited number of patients have locally recurrent Ewing sarcoma on surveillance MRI. These patients often have simultaneous recurrent (metastatic) disease elsewhere, and their outcome is poor. Moreover, some patients present without locally recurrent disease on MRI but disease recurrence elsewhere. Therefore, surveillance MRI currently seems to have little value and should be reconsidered, also given the costs and the repeated exposure of surviving patients to gadolinium-based contrast agents.

Work overload and diagnostic errors in radiology.

PURPOSE: To determine the association between workload and diagnostic errors on clinical CT scans. METHOD: This retrospective study was performed at a tertiary care center and covered the period from January 2020 to March 2023. All clinical CT scans that contained an addendum describing a perceptual error (i.e. failure to detect an important abnormality) in the original report that was issued on office days between 7.30 a.m. and 18.00 p.m., were included. The workload of the involved radiologist on the day of the diagnostic error was calculated in terms of relative value units, and normalized for the known average daily production of each individual radiologist (workloadnormalized). A workloadnormalized of less than 100% indicates relative work underload, while a workloadnormalized of > 100% indicates relative work overload in terms of reported examinations on an individual radiologist's basis. RESULTS: A total of 49 diagnostic errors were included. Top-five locations of diagnostic errors were lung (n = 8), bone (n = 8), lymph nodes (n = 5), peritoneum (n = 5), and liver (n = 4). Workloadnormalized on the days the diagnostic errors were made was on average 121% (95% confidence interval: 106% to 136%), which was significantly higher than 100% (P = 0.008). There was no significant upward monotonic trend in diagnostic errors over the course of the day (Mann-Kendall tau of 0.005, P = 1.000), and there were no other notable temporal trends either. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists appear to have a relative work overload when they make a diagnostic error on CT. Diagnostic errors occurred throughout the entire day, without any increase towards the end of the day.

Why don't we inform patients about the risk of diagnostic errors?

The principles of autonomy and informed consent dictate that patients who undergo a radiological examination should actually be informed about the risk of diagnostic errors. Implementing such a policy could potentially increase the quality of care. However, due to the vast number of radiological examinations that are performed in each hospital each day, financial constraints, and the risk of losing trust, patients, and income if the requirement for informed consent is not imposed by law on a state or national level, it may be challenging to inform patients about the risk of diagnostic errors. Future research is necessary to determine if and how an informed consent procedure for diagnostic errors can be implemented in clinical practice.

[18F]FDG-PET/CT in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 ARDS and persistent inflammation.

Purpose: We report the findings of four critically ill patients who underwent an [18F]FDG-PET/CT because of persistent inflammation during the late phase of their COVID-19. Methods: Four mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 were retrospectively discussed in a research group to evaluate the added value of [18F]FDG-PET/CT. Results: Although pulmonary PET/CT findings differed, bilateral lung anomalies could explain the increased CRP and leukocytes in all patients. This underscores the limited ability of the routine laboratory to discriminate inflammation from secondary infections. Based on PET/CT findings, a secondary infection/inflammatory focus was suspected in two patients (pancreatitis and gastritis). Lymphadenopathy was present in patients with a detectable SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Muscle uptake around the hips or shoulders was observed in all patients, possibly due to the process of heterotopic ossification. Conclusion: This case series illustrates the diagnostic potential of [18F]FDG-PET/CT imaging in critically ill patients with persistent COVID-19 for the identification of other causes of inflammation and demonstrates that this technique can be performed safely in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients.

Radiologist-patient consultation of imaging findings after neck ultrasonography: An opportunity to practice value-based radiology.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how patients experience a radiologist-patient consultation of imaging findings directly after neck ultrasonography (US), and how much time this consumes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized study included 109 consecutive patients who underwent neck US, of whom 44 had a radiologist-patient consultation of US results directly after the examination, and 65 who had not. RESULTS: The median ratings of all healthcare quality metrics (friendliness of the radiologist, explanation of the radiologist, skill of the radiologist, radiologist's concern for comfort during the examination, radiologist's concern for patient questions/worries, overall rating of the examination, and likelihood of recommending the examination) were either good/high or very good/very high, without any significant differences between both patient groups. Patients who did not discuss the US results with the radiologist, were significantly more worried during the examination (P = 0.040) and had significantly higher anxiety levels after completion of the US examination (P = 0.027) than patients who discussed the US results with the radiologist. Fifty-one out of 55 responding patients (92.7%) indicated a radiologist-patient consultation of US results to be important. The median duration of US examinations that included a radiologist-patient consultation of US results was 7.57 min (range: 5.15-12.10 min), while the median duration of US examinations without a radiologist-patient consultation of US results was 7.34 min (range: 3.45-14.32 min), without any significant difference (P = 0.637). CONCLUSION: A radiologist-patient consultation of imaging findings after neck US decreases patient anxiety, is desired by most patients, and does not significantly prolong total examination time.