Visceral adipose tissue volume effect in Crohn's disease using reduced exposure CT enterography.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effect of visceral adipose tissue volume (VA) on reader efficacy in diagnosing and characterizing small bowel Crohn's disease using lower exposure CT enterography (CTE). Secondarily, we investigated the effect of lower exposure and VA on reader diagnostic confidence. METHODS: Prospective paired investigation of 256 CTE, 129 with Crohn's disease, were reconstructed at 100% and simulated 50% and 30% exposure. The senior author provided the disease classification for the 129 patients with Crohn's disease. Patient VA was measured, and exams were evaluated by six readers for presence or absence of Crohn's disease and phenotype using a 0-10-point scale. Logistic regression models assessed the effect of VA on sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The effect of VA on sensitivity was significantly reduced at 30% exposure (odds radio [OR]: 1.00) compared to 100% exposure (OR: 1.12) (p = 0.048). There was no statistically significant difference among the exposures with respect to the effect of visceral fat on specificity (p = 0.159). The study readers' probability of agreement with the senior author on disease classification was 60%, 56%, and 53% at 100%, 50%, and 30% exposure, respectively (p = 0.004). When detecting low severity Crohn's disease, readers' mean sensitivity was 83%, 75%, and 74% at 100%, 50%, and 30% exposure, respectively (p = 0.002). In low severity disease, sensitivity also tended to increase as visceral fat increased (ORs per 1000 cm3 increase in visceral fat: 1.32, 1.31, and 1.18, p = 0.010, 0.016, and 0.100, at 100%, 50%, and 30% exposure). CONCLUSIONS: While the interaction is complex, VA plays a role in detecting and characterizing small bowel Crohn's disease when exposure is altered, particularly in low severity disease.

New Frontier: Role of the Radiologist in Uterine Transplantation.

Uterine transplantation (UT) is a novel treatment for absolute uterine factor infertility (AUFI) that is currently being performed under experimental protocols in multiple medical centers worldwide. At the time of this publication, there have been at least 10 live births by women with a transplanted uterus. As successful outcomes from this innovative procedure increase, it is likely that more centers will perform UT. Imaging is performed in multiple steps of the UT process, including preoperative imaging of potential donors and recipients, posttransplant surveillance, and monitoring of pregnancy. Fetal imaging is performed by maternal-fetal medicine professionals, but most imaging examinations in UT are performed by radiologists. Given the significant role of imaging in this groundbreaking surgery, radiologists must be familiar with the causes of AUFI and the role of imaging in establishing this diagnosis. Radiologists working in medical centers where UT is performed should understand the role of imaging in preoperative planning and postoperative surveillance. While data regarding complications of UT are preliminary at best, radiologists must be aware of the risk of vascular compromise and graft failure and their imaging features. The authors provide a brief history of UT and define the radiologist's role in pre- and postoperative imaging assessments.©RSNA, 2019.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Cost-Effectiveness of Using Private and Medicare Insurance in Community-Based Health Care Facilities.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a cost-effective alternative to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) for both Medicare and privately insured patients undergoing screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective data analysis was performed between July 15, 2013, and July 14, 2014, with data on women presenting for screening mammography that included any additional radiologic workup (n = 6319). Patients chose to undergo DBT or FFDM on the basis of personal preference, physician suggestion, and cost difference. The summation of findings over the 1-year period were used to calculate recall rates, cancer detection rates, and billing costs for a regional private insurer and Medicare. RESULTS: Data from the 6319 patients who participated were divided: 3655 patients underwent DBT, and 2664 underwent FFDM during the year of screening. Private insurance billing cost $2.9 million, and Medicare cost $1.2 million for screening, follow-up imaging, and radiologic procedures. Per-person costs were approximately $40 higher for the DBT group using both forms of insurance. However, cost per cancer detected was lower in the DBT group for both private and governmental insurance, leading to potentially $3.7 million and $899,000 saved per 100 cancers found. After standardization of the difference in cancer detection rates between the two groups, DBT was a cost-equivalent alternative to FFDM for private insurance billing but was a cost-inefficient alternative with respect to Medicare costs. CONCLUSION: In a community-based setting, DBT is a cost-equivalent or potentially cost-effective alternative to FFDM and has the capacity for improving cancer detection and recall rates.