Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 17(5S): S226-S238, 2020 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32370967

RESUMEN

Although primary bone tumors are relatively uncommon, appropriate imaging evaluation is essential when they are suspected or incidentally detected. In almost all cases, radiographs are the most appropriate initial imaging study for screening and characterization of primary bone tumors. Radiographs often provide sufficient information for diagnosis and to guide the treating clinician. However, when conventional radiographs alone are inadequate, they still often guide the selection of the most appropriate next step for advanced imaging. MRI and CT are typically the most appropriate next step. MRI provides excellent soft-tissue contrast allowing for evaluation of the tissue composition (such as fat, hemorrhage, fluid levels) and anatomic extent of bone tumors. CT provides complementary information, with its ability to detect subtle matrix mineralization or periosteal reaction that may not be seen on radiographs or MRI. This publication focuses on six common variants to guide diagnosis and management of primary bone tumors. In addition to conventional radiographs, appropriate use of MRI, CT, PET/CT, bone scan, and ultrasound are discussed. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Neoplasias Óseas/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Sociedades Médicas , Ultrasonografía , Estados Unidos
2.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(5S): S189-S202, 2017 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473075

RESUMEN

Osteoporosis is a considerable public health risk, with 50% of women and 20% of men >50 years of age experiencing fracture, with mortality rates of 20% within the first year. Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the primary diagnostic modality by which to screen women >65 years of age and men >70 years of age for osteoporosis. In postmenopausal women <65 years of age with additional risk factors for fracture, DXA is recommended. Some patients with bone mineral density above the threshold for treatment may qualify for treatment on the basis of vertebral body fractures detected through a vertebral fracture assessment scan, a lateral spine equivalent generated from a commercial DXA machine. Quantitative CT is useful in patients with advanced degenerative bony changes in their spines. New technologies such as trabecular bone score represent an emerging role for qualitative assessment of bone in clinical practice. It is critical that both radiologists and referring providers consider osteoporosis in their patients, thereby reducing substantial morbidity, mortality, and cost to the health care system. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis/diagnóstico por imagen , Anciano , Femenino , Fémur/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Factores de Riesgo , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Ultrasonografía
3.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 14(5S): S81-S89, 2017 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28473097

RESUMEN

Evaluation for suspected inflammatory arthritis as a cause for chronic extremity joint pain often relies on imaging. This review first discusses the characteristic osseous and soft tissue abnormalities seen with inflammatory arthritis and how they may be imaged. It is essential that imaging results are interpreted in the context of clinical and serologic results to add specificity as there is significant overlap of imaging findings among the various types of arthritis. This review provides recommendations for imaging evaluation of specific types of inflammatory arthritis, including rheumatoid arthritis, seronegative spondyloarthropathy, gout, calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate disease (or pseudogout), and erosive osteoarthritis. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.


Asunto(s)
Artralgia/diagnóstico por imagen , Artritis/diagnóstico por imagen , Dolor Crónico/diagnóstico por imagen , Extremidades/diagnóstico por imagen , Artralgia/etiología , Artritis/complicaciones , Dolor Crónico/etiología , Humanos , Radiología , Sociedades Médicas , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA