Radiology Teaching Files: an Assessment of Their Role and Desired Features Based on a National Survey.

A radiology teaching file (TF) is a system containing a collection of cases with teaching value. Given the wide variety of TF solutions available, we conducted a national survey to better understand the need for TFs, TF features desired by users and their current implementation. A 28-question survey was created which explored TF implementation, utilization, and preferences among respondents. The survey was emailed to residents and faculty throughout the USA, with a request for program coordinators to forward the survey to their departments. The survey was completed by 396 respondents from 115 different institutions. These respondents included 60% residents, 21% attendings (non-program directors), 12% program directors, 5% fellows, and 1% medical students. TFs were assigned to one of three categories: personal TFs, shared in-house TFs, and public TFs. Seventy-six percent of respondents kept a personal TF using a variety of media, and 67% used a shared in-house TF. Of the public TFs used, the most popular were those requiring paid subscriptions. The features respondents valued most provided efficient querying of cases, simulated basic PACS functionality, enabled self-directed learning, and facilitated case submissions. There is a trend toward utilizing electronic media for TFs. The media utilized should be understood and reviewed to ensure PHI is properly secured. Contemporary users demand a high degree of functionality from TF solutions, and use both in-house and commercial products to meet their needs.

Assessment of 1 mSv urinary tract stone CT with model-based iterative reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate stone detection, assessment of secondary signs of stone disease, and diagnostic confidence utilizing submillisievert CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) in a North American population with diverse body habitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two adults underwent stone CT using a split-dose protocol; weight-based projected volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were divided into two separate acquisitions at 80% and 20% dose levels. Images were reconstructed with MBIR. Five blinded readers counted stones in three size categories and rated "overall diagnostic confidence" and "detectability of secondary signs of stone disease" on a 0-4 scale at both dose levels. Effective dose (ED) in mSv was calculated as DLP multiplied by conversion coefficient, k, equal to 0.017. RESULTS: Mean ED (80%, 3.90±1.44 mSv; vs 20%, 0.97±0.34 mSv [p<0.001]) and number of stones detected (80%, 193.6±25.0; vs 20%, 154.4±15.4 [p=0.03]) were higher in scans at 80% dose level. Intrareader correlation between scans at 80% and 20% dose levels was excellent (0.83-0.97). With 80% scans as reference standard, mean sensitivity and specificity at 20% varied with stone size (<3 mm, 74% and 77%; ≥3 mm, 92% and 82%). The 20% scans scored lower than 80% scans in diagnostic confidence (2.46±0.50; vs 3.21±0.36 [p<0.005]) and detectability of secondary signs (2.41±0.39; vs 3.19±0.29 [p<0.005]). CONCLUSION: Aggressively dose-reduced (~1 mSv) MBIR scans detected most urinary tract stones of 3 mm or larger but underperformed the low-dose reference standard (3-4 mSv) scans in small (<3 mm) stone detection and diagnostic confidence.

T2-weighted MR imaging in the assessment of cirrhotic liver.

PURPOSE: To assess if T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging provides added diagnostic value in combination with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in the detection and characterization of nodular lesions in cirrhotic liver. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two readers retrospectively and independently analyzed 54 MR imaging studies in 52 patients with cirrhosis. In session 1, readers reviewed T1-weighted and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced images. In session 2, readers reviewed T1-weighted, dynamic gadolinium-enhanced, and respiratory-triggered T2-weighted fast spin-echo images. Readers identified and characterized all focal lesions by using a scale of 1-4 (1, definitely benign; 4, definitely malignant). Multireader correlated receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was employed to assess radiologist performance in session 2 compared with session 1. The difference in the areas under the ROC curves for the two sessions was tested. In a third session, readers assessed conspicuity of biopsy-proved lesions on T2-weighted MR images by using a scale of 1-3 (1, not seen; 3, well seen) and identified causes of reduced conspicuity. RESULTS: Two additional benign lesions were detected by each reader in session 2. Fifty-five lesions had pathologic verification, including 32 malignant, three high-grade dysplastic, and 20 benign nodules. There was no significant difference in the area under the ROC curves between the two sessions (P =.48). Thirty-two lesions were inconspicuous on T2-weighted MR images because of parenchymal heterogeneity, breathing artifacts (particularly in patients with ascites), and lesion isointensity with liver parenchyma. T2-weighted MR imaging was useful in the evaluation of cysts and lymph nodes. CONCLUSION: T2-weighted MR imaging does not provide added diagnostic value in the detection and characterization of focal lesions in cirrhotic liver.