Quantitative Airway Assessment of Diffuse Idiopathic Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Cell Hyperplasia (DIPNECH) on CT as a Novel Biomarker.

Objectives: Diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia (DIPNECH) occurs due to abnormal proliferation of pulmonary neuroendocrine cells. We hypothesized that performing a quantitative analysis of airway features on chest CT may reveal differences to matched controls, which could ultimately help provide an imaging biomarker. Methods: A retrospective quantitative analysis of chest CTs in patients with DIPNECH and age matched controls was carried out using semi-automated post-processing software. Paired segmental airway and artery diameters were measured for each bronchopulmonary segment, and the airway:artery (AA) ratio, airway wall thickness:artery ratio (AWTA ratio) and wall area percentage (WAP) calculated. Nodule number, size, shape and location was recorded. Correlation between CT measurements and pulmonary function testing was performed. Results: 16 DIPNECH and 16 control subjects were analysed (all female, mean age 61.7 +/− 11.8 years), a combined total of 425 bronchopulmonary segments. The mean AwtA ratio, AA ratio and WAP for the DIPNECH group was 0.57, 1.18 and 68.8%, respectively, compared with 0.38, 1.03 and 58.3% in controls (p < 0.001, <0.001, 0.03, respectively). DIPNECH patients had more nodules than controls (22.4 +/− 32.6 vs. 3.6 +/− 3.6, p = 0.03). AA ratio correlated with FVC (R2 = 0.47, p = 0.02). A multivariable model incorporating nodule number, AA ratio and AWTA-ratio demonstrated good performance for discriminating DIPNECH and controls (AUC 0.971; 95% CI: 0.925−1.0). Conclusions: Quantitative CT airway analysis in patients with DIPNECH demonstrates increased airway wall thickness and airway:artery ratio compared to controls. Advances in knowledge: Quantitative CT measurement of airway wall thickening offers a potential imaging biomarker for treatment response.

Computed tomography versus invasive coronary angiography: design and methods of the pragmatic randomised multicentre DISCHARGE trial.

OBJECTIVES: More than 3.5 million invasive coronary angiographies (ICA) are performed in Europe annually. Approximately 2 million of these invasive procedures might be reduced by noninvasive tests because no coronary intervention is performed. Computed tomography (CT) is the most accurate noninvasive test for detection and exclusion of coronary artery disease (CAD). To investigate the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA, we designed the European pragmatic multicentre DISCHARGE trial funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Union (EC-GA 603266). METHODS: In this trial, patients with a low-to-intermediate pretest probability (10-60 %) of suspected CAD and a clinical indication for ICA because of stable chest pain will be randomised in a 1-to-1 ratio to CT or ICA. CT and ICA findings guide subsequent management decisions by the local heart teams according to current evidence and European guidelines. RESULTS: Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke as a composite endpoint will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary and other outcomes include cost-effectiveness, radiation exposure, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), socioeconomic status, lifestyle, adverse events related to CT/ICA, and gender differences. CONCLUSIONS: The DISCHARGE trial will assess the comparative effectiveness of CT and ICA. KEY POINTS: • Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. • Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the reference standard for detection of CAD. • Noninvasive computed tomography angiography excludes CAD with high sensitivity. • CT may effectively reduce the approximately 2 million negative ICAs in Europe. • DISCHARGE addresses this hypothesis in patients with low-to-intermediate pretest probability for CAD.

Emergency cardiac CT for suspected acute coronary syndrome: qualitative and quantitative assessment of coronary, pulmonary, and aortic image quality.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a dedicated coronary CT protocol provides adequate contrast enhancement and artifact-free depiction of coronary, pulmonary, and aortic circulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dedicated coronary 64-MDCT data sets of 50 patients (27 men; mean age, 54 +/- 12.4 years) consecutively admitted from the emergency department with suspected acute coronary syndrome were analyzed. Two independent observers graded overall coronary arterial image quality and qualitative and quantitative contrast opacification, motion, and streak artifacts within the pulmonary arteries and aorta. RESULTS: Coronary image quality was excellent in 48 patients (96%) and moderate in two patients (4%). Eleven left main and 22 left upper lobar pulmonary arteries were not visualized. Qualitative evaluation showed pulmonary arterial tree opacification to be excellent except for the right and left lower lateral and posterior segmental branches (52-54% rate of poor opacification). Quantitative evaluation showed four central (8%), six lobar (8%), and 206 segmental (29%) branches had poor contrast opacification (< 200 HU). Nineteen right upper lobar arteries (38%) were slightly and one was severely affected by streak artifact. At the segmental pulmonary artery level, marked differences in contrast enhancement were detected between the upper (292 +/- 72 HU) and both the middle (249 +/- 85 HU) and the lower lobes (248 +/- 76 HU) (p < 0.01). Mean aortic opacification was 300 +/- 34 HU with excellent contrast homogeneity without severe motion or streak artifacts. CONCLUSION: In the evaluation of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute coronary syndrome, a dedicated coronary CT protocol enables excellent assessment of the coronary arteries and proximal ascending aorta but does not depict the pulmonary vasculature well enough for exclusion of pulmonary embolism.

Finding evidence-based answers to practical questions in radiology: which patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma will survive longer after transarterial chemoembolization?

To some, evidence-based practice (EBP) means the identification of centers that produce evidence reports and technology assessments to support guideline development. To others, EBP is the best research evidence integrated with clinical expertise and patient values. Inherent in the first approach is the implication that only central academic organizations can produce valid, reliable analyses of existing literature, which will then be distributed to ordinary practitioners. The second approach implies that ordinary practitioners can learn to use a stepwise approach and a preprepared set of rules and tools to effectively find the best current literature, appraise it, and then apply local circumstances to these rules and tools in their hospital. Paul Glasziou, director of the Centre for Evidence-based Practice in Oxford, England, has coined the phrases top-down EBP and bottom-up EBP to describe these approaches. In this article, the authors describe how knowledge gaps in an ordinary radiology practice can be addressed by using stepwise bottom-up EBP techniques. The following clinical scenario is used: Your hospital's recently appointed chief hepatobiliary surgeon questions the use of transarterial chemoembolization for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma because of his concerns after reading a recent review article suggesting that there is no clear survival benefit to using this procedure. What would you do? Here is how the authors would do it.