Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus on Routine Pelvic US for Endometriosis.

Endometriosis is a prevalent and potentially debilitating condition that mostly affects individuals of reproductive age, and often has a substantial diagnostic delay. US is usually the first-line imaging modality used when patients report chronic pelvic pain or have issues of infertility, both common symptoms of endometriosis. Other than the visualization of an endometrioma, sonologists frequently do not appreciate endometriosis on routine transvaginal US images. Given a substantial body of literature describing techniques to depict endometriosis at US, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to make recommendations aimed at improving the screening process for endometriosis. The panel was composed of experts in the imaging and management of endometriosis, including radiologists, sonographers, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, and minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons. A comprehensive literature review combined with a modified Delphi technique achieved a consensus. This statement defines the targeted screening population, describes techniques for augmenting pelvic US, establishes direct and indirect observations for endometriosis at US, creates an observational grading and reporting system, and makes recommendations for additional imaging and patient management. The panel recommends transvaginal US of the posterior compartment, observation of the relative positioning of the uterus and ovaries, and the uterine sliding sign maneuver to improve the detection of endometriosis. These additional techniques can be performed in 5 minutes or less and could ultimately decrease the delay of an endometriosis diagnosis in at-risk patients.

Advanced Quality Training in Radiology: Inaugural Report of a 2-Year Program.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the outcomes of a 2-year advanced quality training program for radiology residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In 2016, the radiology quality committee of a quaternary health system created a hands-on 2-year advanced quality training curriculum for diagnostic and interventional radiology residents. Internal candidates with the following prerequisites submitted competitive applications: registration for a 2-day lean health care management course, completion of four or more Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) quality essentials certificates, identification of faculty mentor(s), selection of one quality improvement project to champion, and completion of a two-page essay summarizing interest in quality improvement, the proposed project, and its potential impact. Residents were required to attend monthly quality meetings, pursue their project and its derivatives, submit completed work for consideration to a national meeting and for publication, and present at departmental grand rounds. Outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS. Five residents submitted four projects for consideration, and all five were selected. In addition to the four submitted projects, seven additional projects were pursued. Participants worked on nine local and three multicenter process improvements, gave one to two grand rounds each, presented three oral and five poster presentations, generated eight publications, received three awards, formed 14 mentor-mentee relationships, and influenced local and multisite practice patterns. Participants reported gaining firsthand experience in quality improvement principles and developing real-world leadership skills. CONCLUSION. A targeted 2-year curriculum emphasizing hands-on quality improvement experience with rich mentor-mentee relationships can produce meaningful results.

Standardized report template for indeterminate renal masses at CT and MRI: a collaborative product of the SAR Disease-Focused Panel on Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To create a succinct yet comprehensive evidence-based structured report template for indeterminate renal masses characterized at CT and MRI. METHODS: This IRB-exempt, iterative, multi-institutional quality improvement project was informed by published data derived from a multi-institutional survey and a multi-institutional review of CT and MRI radiology reports. A two-stage blinded Delphi process by the 16-member 12-institution Society of Abdominal Radiology Disease-Focused Panel on Renal Cell Carcinoma was conducted to create a structured report template for indeterminate renal masses evaluated at CT and MRI. Individual reporting characteristics were scored by members as 'core,' 'optional,' or 'exclude.' Threshold for inclusion was ≥ 80% support. If < 80% members considered a characteristic a 'core' feature, but ≥ 80% considered it either 'core' or 'optional,' it was considered an 'optional' feature. If neither was the case, the characteristic was excluded. Free-text comments were permitted. Characteristics considered 'core' by 50-99% of respondents in Round 1 (i.e., nonunanimous support) and uninvestigated free-text comments were assessed in Round 2. Core and optional structured reporting templates were derived. RESULTS: The response rate was 100% in Round 1 (16/16) and Round 2 (16/16). In Round 1, 5 characteristics had unanimous support as 'core' features. Following Round 2, 13 characteristics had ≥ 80% support as 'core' features, and 10 characteristics had ≥ 80% support as 'optional' features. Structured report templates were derived. DISCUSSION: Structured 'core' and 'optional' templates for indeterminate renal masses at CT and MRI were derived, which may improve compliance with reporting preferred and essential imaging characteristics.

Correction to: Multi-institutional analysis of CT and MRI reports evaluating indeterminate renal masses: comparison to a national survey investigating desired report elements.

The original version of this article contained an error in author name. The co-author's name was published as Ivan M. Pedrosa, instead it should be Ivan Pedrosa. The original article has been corrected.

Multi-institutional analysis of CT and MRI reports evaluating indeterminate renal masses: comparison to a national survey investigating desired report elements.

PURPOSE: To determine the need for a standardized renal mass reporting template by analyzing reports of indeterminate renal masses and comparing their contents to stated preferences of radiologists and urologists. METHODS: The host IRB waived regulatory oversight for this multi-institutional HIPAA-compliant quality improvement effort. CT and MRI reports created to characterize an indeterminate renal mass were analyzed from 6 community (median: 17 reports/site) and 6 academic (median: 23 reports/site) United States practices. Report contents were compared to a published national survey of stated preferences by academic radiologists and urologists from 9 institutions. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests were calculated. RESULTS: Of 319 reports, 85% (271; 192 CT, 79 MRI) reported a possibly malignant mass (236 solid, 35 cystic). Some essential elements were commonly described: size (99% [269/271]), mass type (solid vs. cystic; 99% [268/271]), enhancement (presence vs. absence; 92% [248/271]). Other essential elements had incomplete penetrance: the presence or absence of fat in solid masses (14% [34/236]), size comparisons when available (79% [111/140]), Bosniak classification for cystic masses (54% [19/35]). Preferred but non-essential elements generally were described in less than half of reports. Nephrometry scores usually were not included for local therapy candidates (12% [30/257]). Academic practices were significantly more likely than community practices to include mass characterization details, probability of malignancy, and staging. Community practices were significantly more likely to include management recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Renal mass reporting elements considered essential or preferred often are omitted in radiology reports. Variation exists across radiologists and practice settings. A standardized template may mitigate these inconsistencies.

Expanding the Definition of a Benign Renal Cyst on Contrast-enhanced CT: Can Incidental Homogeneous Renal Masses Measuring 21-39 HU be Safely Ignored?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the frequency and clinical significance of homogeneous renal masses measuring 21-39 Hounsfield units on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT). METHODS: Subjects 40-69 years old undergoing portal-venous-phase contrast-enhanced abdominal CT from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010 with slice thickness ≤5 mm and no prior CT or magnetic resonance imaging were identified (n = 1387) for this institutional review board-approved retrospective cohort study. Images were manually reviewed by three radiologists in consensus to identify all circumscribed homogeneous renal masses (maximum of three per subject) ≥10 mm with a measured attenuation of 21-39 Hounsfield units. Exclusion criteria were known renal cancer or imaging performed for a renal indication. The primary outcome was retrospective characterization as a clinically significant mass, defined as a solid mass, a Bosniak IIF/III/IV mass, or extirpative therapy or metastatic renal cancer within 5 years' follow-up. RESULTS: Eligible masses (n = 74) were found in 5% (63/1387) of subjects. Of those with a reference standard (n = 42), none (0% [95% CI: 0.0%-8.4%]) were determined to be clinically significant. CONCLUSION: Incidental renal masses on contrast-enhanced CT that are homogeneous and display an attenuation of 21-39 Hounsfield units are uncommon in patients 40-69 years of age, unlikely to be clinically significant, and may not need further imaging evaluation. If these results can be replicated in an independent and larger population, the practical definition of a benign cyst on imaging may be able to be expanded.

Reporting standards for the imaging-based diagnosis of renal masses on CT and MRI: a national survey of academic abdominal radiologists and urologists.

PURPOSE: To define important elements of a structured radiology report of a CT or MRI performed to evaluate an indeterminate renal mass. METHODS: IRB approval was waived for this multi-site prospective quality improvement study. A 35-question survey investigating elements of a CT or MRI report describing a renal mass was created through an iterative process by the Society of Abdominal Radiology Disease-Focused Panel on renal cell carcinoma. Surveys were distributed to consenting abdominal radiologists and urologists at nine academic institutions. Consensus within and between specialties was defined as ≥70% agreement. Respondent rates were compared with Chi Square test. RESULTS: The response rate was 68% (117/171; 55% [39/71] urologists, 78% [78/100] radiologists). Inter-specialty consensus was that the following were essential: mass size with comparison to prior imaging, mass type (cystic vs. solid), presence of fat, presence of enhancement, and radiologic stage. Urologists were more likely to prefer the Nephrometry score (75% [27/36] vs. 22% [17/76], p < 0.0001), quantitative reporting of enhancement on CT (85% [32/38] vs. 46% [36/77], p < 0.0001), and mass position with respect to the renal polar lines (67% [24/36] vs. 36% [27/76], p = 0.002). There was inter-specialty consensus that the Bosniak classification for cystic masses was preferred. Most urologists (60% [21/35]) preferred management recommendations be omitted for solid masses or Bosniak III-IV cystic masses. CONCLUSIONS: Important elements to include in a CT or MRI report of an indeterminate renal mass are critical diagnostic features, the Bosniak classification if relevant, and the most likely specific diagnosis when feasible; including management recommendations is controversial.

Short-term outcomes of Chait Trapdoor for antegrade continence enema in adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine our short-term experience of antegrade continence enema (ACE) delivered via a Chait Trapdoor (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) in adults with intractable neurogenic bowel. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review at the Universities of Utah and Minnesota of 15 patients with Chait Trapdoor placed for the purpose of ACE from 2011 to 2013. Our primary outcome was continued utilization of the Chait Trapdoor. Secondary outcomes included volume of ACE used and time to produce a bowel movement. RESULTS: All patients had neurogenic bowel refractory to conventional bowel regimen. Mean follow-up was 6 months (range, 1-17 months). Thirteen patients had the Chait Trapdoor placed in the splenic flexure and 2 had it placed in the cecum. Of the 15 patients, 12 (80%) were still using the Chait Trapdoor at last follow-up. A median of 425 mL (range, 120-1000 mL) of fluid was used to produce a bowel movement in 5-120 minutes. Two patients developed postoperative wound infections, requiring return to the operating room (Clavien IIIb). Long-term complications included 5 patients with a dislodged tube requiring replacement by interventional radiology and 2 patients with local cellulitis. Two patients had the Chait Trapdoor moved to a new location to improve efficacy. CONCLUSION: Although the revision, removal, and complication rates were high, 80% of the patients were satisfied with the function and continued to use the Chait Trapdoor. The volume of irrigation required for ACE and the time it takes to produce a bowel movement vary significantly between patients.