Inhaled amikacin for treatment of refractory pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease.

RATIONALE: Treatment of pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacteria, especially Mycobacterium abscessus, requires prolonged, multidrug regimens with high toxicity and suboptimal efficacy. Options for refractory disease are limited. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the efficacy and toxicity of inhaled amikacin in patients with treatment-refractory nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease. METHODS: Records were queried to identify patients who had inhaled amikacin added to failing regimens. Lower airway microbiology, symptoms, and computed tomography scan changes were assessed together with reported toxicity. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The majority (80%) of the 20 patients who met entry criteria were women; all had bronchiectasis, two had cystic fibrosis and one had primary ciliary dyskinesia. At initiation of inhaled amikacin, 15 were culture positive for M. abscessus and 5 for Mycobacterium avium complex and had received a median (range) of 60 (6, 190) months of mycobacterial treatment. Patients were followed for a median of 19 (1, 50) months. Eight (40%) patients had at least one negative culture and 5 (25%) had persistently negative cultures. A decrease in smear quantity was noted in 9 of 20 (45%) and in mycobacterial culture growth for 10 of 19 (53%). Symptom scores improved in nine (45%), were unchanged in seven (35%), and worsened in four (20%). Improvement on computed tomography scans was noted in 6 (30%), unchanged in 3 (15%), and worsened in 11 (55%). Seven (35%) stopped amikacin due to: ototoxicity in two (10%), hemoptysis in two (10%), and nephrotoxicity, persistent dysphonia, and vertigo in one each. CONCLUSIONS: In some patients with treatment-refractory pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease, the addition of inhaled amikacin was associated with microbiologic and/or symptomatic improvement; however, toxicity was common. Prospective evaluation of inhaled amikacin for mycobacterial disease is warranted.

Radiology stewardship and quality improvement: the process and costs of implementing a CT radiation dose optimization committee in a medium-sized community hospital system.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to measure the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary CT dose optimization committee and estimate its costs and to describe a radiation stewardship quality improvement initiative in one CT department at a medium-sized community hospital system that used a participatory design committee methodology. METHODS: A CT dose optimization committee was conceived, funded, and formed, consisting of the following stakeholders: radiologists, technologists, consultant medical physicists, and an administrator. Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and repeat rate were monitored for 1 month, for one scan type, during which iterative protocol adjustments were made through committee interaction. Effects on repeat rate and CTDIvol were quantified and benchmarked against national diagnostic reference levels after retrospective medical record review of 100 consecutive patients before and after the intervention. Labor hours were reported and wage resources estimated. RESULTS: Over 3 months, the committee met in person twice and exchanged 128 e-mails in establishing a process for protocol improvement and measurement of success. Repeat rate was reduced from 13% (13 of 100) to 0% (0 of 100). Scans meeting the ACR reference level for CTDIvol (75 mGy) improved by 34% (38 of 100 before, 51 of 100 after; Fisher's exact 2-tailed P = .09), and those meeting ACR pass/fail criterion (80 mGy) improved by 29% (58 of 100 before, 75 of 100 after; Fisher's exact 2-tailed P = .01). Committee evolution and work, and protocol development and implementation, required 57 person-hours, at an estimated labor cost of $12,488. CONCLUSIONS: An efficient process was established as a proof of concept for the use of a multidisciplinary committee to reduce patient radiation dose, repeat rate, and variability in image quality. The committee and process ultimately improved the quality of patient care, fostered a culture of safety and ongoing quality improvement, and calculated costs for such an endeavor.