A Multicenter Assessment of Interreader Reliability of LI-RADS Version 2018 for MRI and CT.

Background Various limitations have impacted research evaluating reader agreement for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). Purpose To assess reader agreement of LI-RADS in an international multicenter multireader setting using scrollable images. Materials and Methods This retrospective study used deidentified clinical multiphase CT and MRI and reports with at least one untreated observation from six institutions and three countries; only qualifying examinations were submitted. Examination dates were October 2017 to August 2018 at the coordinating center. One untreated observation per examination was randomly selected using observation identifiers, and its clinically assigned features were extracted from the report. The corresponding LI-RADS version 2018 category was computed as a rescored clinical read. Each examination was randomly assigned to two of 43 research readers who independently scored the observation. Agreement for an ordinal modified four-category LI-RADS scale (LR-1, definitely benign; LR-2, probably benign; LR-3, intermediate probability of malignancy; LR-4, probably hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]; LR-5, definitely HCC; LR-M, probably malignant but not HCC specific; and LR-TIV, tumor in vein) was computed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Agreement was also computed for dichotomized malignancy (LR-4, LR-5, LR-M, and LR-TIV), LR-5, and LR-M. Agreement was compared between research-versus-research reads and research-versus-clinical reads. Results The study population consisted of 484 patients (mean age, 62 years ± 10 [SD]; 156 women; 93 CT examinations, 391 MRI examinations). ICCs for ordinal LI-RADS, dichotomized malignancy, LR-5, and LR-M were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.73), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.70), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.66), and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.61) respectively. Research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical agreement for modified four-category LI-RADS (ICC, 0.68 vs 0.62, respectively; P = .03) and for dichotomized malignancy (ICC, 0.63 vs 0.53, respectively; P = .005), but not for LR-5 (P = .14) or LR-M (P = .94). Conclusion There was moderate agreement for LI-RADS version 2018 overall. For some comparisons, research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical reader agreement, indicating differences between the clinical and research environments that warrant further study. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorials by Johnson and Galgano and Smith in this issue.

Epidemiologic and Clinical Features of Mpox-Associated Deaths - United States, May 10, 2022-March 7, 2023.

As of March 7, 2023, a total of 30,235 confirmed and probable monkeypox (mpox) cases were reported in the United States,† predominantly among cisgender men§ who reported recent sexual contact with another man (1). Although most mpox cases during the current outbreak have been self-limited, cases of severe illness and death have been reported (2-4). During May 10, 2022-March 7, 2023, 38 deaths among persons with probable or confirmed mpox¶ (1.3 per 1,000 mpox cases) were reported to CDC and classified as mpox-associated (i.e., mpox was listed as a contributing or causal factor). Among the 38 mpox-associated deaths, 94.7% occurred in cisgender men (median age = 34 years); 86.8% occurred in non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) persons. The median interval from symptom onset to death was 68 days (IQR = 50-86 days). Among 33 decedents with available information, 93.9% were immunocompromised because of HIV. Public health actions to prevent mpox deaths include integrated testing, diagnosis, and early treatment for mpox and HIV, and ensuring equitable access to both mpox and HIV prevention and treatment, such as antiretroviral therapy (ART) (5).

Adrenal Neoplasms: Lessons from Adrenal Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards.

The radiologic diagnosis of adrenal disease can be challenging in settings of atypical presentations, mimics of benign and malignant adrenal masses, and rare adrenal anomalies. Misdiagnosis may lead to suboptimal management and adverse outcomes. Adrenal adenoma is the most common benign adrenal tumor that arises from the cortex, whereas adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare malignant tumor of the cortex. Adrenal cyst and myelolipoma are other benign adrenal lesions and are characterized by their fluid and fat content, respectively. Pheochromocytoma is a rare neuroendocrine tumor of the adrenal medulla. Metastases to the adrenal glands are the most common malignant adrenal tumors. While many of these masses have classic imaging appearances, considerable overlap exists between benign and malignant lesions and can pose a diagnostic challenge. Atypical adrenal adenomas include those that are lipid poor; contain macroscopic fat, hemorrhage, and/or iron; are heterogeneous and/or large; and demonstrate growth. Heterogeneous adrenal adenomas may mimic ACC, metastasis, or pheochromocytoma, particularly when they are 4 cm or larger, whereas smaller versions of ACC, metastasis, and pheochromocytoma and those with washout greater than 60% may mimic adenoma. Because of its nonenhanced CT attenuation of less than or equal to 10 HU, a lipid-rich adrenal adenoma may be mimicked by a benign adrenal cyst, or it may be mimicked by a tumor with central cystic and/or necrotic change such as ACC, pheochromocytoma, or metastasis. Rare adrenal tumors such as hemangioma, ganglioneuroma, and oncocytoma also may mimic adrenal adenoma, ACC, metastasis, and pheochromocytoma. The authors describe cases of adrenal neoplasms that they have encountered in clinical practice and presented to adrenal multidisciplinary tumor boards. Key lessons to aid in diagnosis and further guide appropriate management are provided. © RSNA, 2023 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.

Liver Fibrosis, Fat, and Iron Evaluation with MRI and Fibrosis and Fat Evaluation with US: A Practical Guide for Radiologists.

Quantitative imaging biomarkers of liver disease measured by using MRI and US are emerging as important clinical tools in the management of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Because of their high accuracy and noninvasive nature, in many cases, these techniques have replaced liver biopsy for the diagnosis, quantitative staging, and treatment monitoring of patients with CLD. The most commonly evaluated imaging biomarkers are surrogates for liver fibrosis, fat, and iron. MR elastography is now routinely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and typically combined with MRI-based liver fat and iron quantification to exclude or grade hepatic steatosis and iron overload, respectively. US elastography is also widely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and has the advantage of lower equipment cost and greater availability compared with those of MRI. Emerging US fat quantification methods can be performed along with US elastography. The author group, consisting of members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Liver Fibrosis Disease-Focused Panel (DFP), the SAR Hepatic Iron Overload DFP, and the European Society of Radiology, review the basics of liver fibrosis, fat, and iron quantification with MRI and liver fibrosis and fat quantification with US. The authors cover technical requirements, typical case display, quality control and proper measurement technique and case interpretation guidelines, pitfalls, and confounding factors. The authors aim to provide a practical guide for radiologists interpreting these examinations. © RSNA, 2023 See the invited commentary by Ronot in this issue. Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage, by Race and Ethnicity - National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module, United States, December 2020-November 2021.

Some racial and ethnic minority groups have experienced disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19-related illness and mortality (1,2). Vaccination is highly effective in preventing severe COVID-19 illness and death (3), and equitable vaccination can reduce COVID-19-related disparities. CDC analyzed data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM), a random-digit-dialed cellular telephone survey of adults aged ≥18 years, to assess disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage by race and ethnicity among U.S. adults during December 2020-November 2021. Asian and non-Hispanic White (White) adults had the highest ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage by the end of April 2021 (69.6% and 59.0%, respectively); ≥1-dose coverage was lower among Hispanic (47.3%), non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (46.3%), Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NH/OPI) (45.9%), multiple or other race (42.6%), and American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (38.7%) adults. By the end of November 2021, national ≥1-dose COVID-19 vaccination coverage was similar for Black (78.2%), Hispanic (81.3%), NH/OPI (75.7%), and White adults (78.7%); however, coverage remained lower for AI/AN (61.8%) and multiple or other race (68.0%) adults. Booster doses of COVID-19 vaccine are now recommended for all adults (4), but disparities in booster dose coverage among the fully vaccinated have become apparent (5). Tailored efforts including community partnerships and trusted sources of information could be used to increase vaccination coverage among the groups with identified persistent disparities and can help achieve vaccination equity and prevent new disparities by race and ethnicity in booster dose coverage.

COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage and Vaccine Confidence by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity - United States, August 29-October 30, 2021.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations have higher prevalences of health conditions associated with severe COVID-19 illness compared with non-LGBT populations (1). The potential for low vaccine confidence and coverage among LGBT populations is of concern because these persons historically experience challenges accessing, trusting, and receiving health care services (2). Data on COVID-19 vaccination among LGBT persons are limited, in part because of the lack of routine data collection on sexual orientation and gender identity at the national and state levels. During August 29-October 30, 2021, data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) were analyzed to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage and confidence in COVID-19 vaccines among LGBT adults aged ≥18 years. By sexual orientation, gay or lesbian adults reported higher vaccination coverage overall (85.4%) than did heterosexual adults (76.3%). By race/ethnicity, adult gay or lesbian non-Hispanic White men (94.1%) and women (88.5%), and Hispanic men (82.5%) reported higher vaccination coverage than that reported by non-Hispanic White heterosexual men (74.2%) and women (78. 6%). Among non-Hispanic Black adults, vaccination coverage was lower among gay or lesbian women (57.9%) and bisexual women (62.1%) than among heterosexual women (75.6%). Vaccination coverage was lowest among non-Hispanic Black LGBT persons across all categories of sexual orientation and gender identity. Among gay or lesbian adults and bisexual adults, vaccination coverage was lower among women (80.5% and 74.2%, respectively) than among men (88.9% and 81.7%, respectively). By gender identity, similar percentages of adults who identified as transgender or nonbinary and those who did not identify as transgender or nonbinary were vaccinated. Gay or lesbian adults and bisexual adults were more confident than were heterosexual adults in COVID-19 vaccine safety and protection; transgender or nonbinary adults were more confident in COVID-19 vaccine protection, but not safety, than were adults who did not identify as transgender or nonbinary. To prevent serious illness and death, it is important that all persons in the United States, including those in the LGBT community, stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

Liver imaging: it is time to adopt standardized terminology.

Liver imaging plays a vital role in the management of patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, progress in the field is challenged by nonuniform and inconsistent terminology in the published literature. The Steering Committee of the American College of Radiology (ACR)'s Liver Imaging Reporting And Data System (LI-RADS), in conjunction with the LI-RADS Lexicon Writing Group and the LI-RADS International Working Group, present this consensus document to establish a single universal liver imaging lexicon. The lexicon is intended for use in research, education, and clinical care of patients at risk for HCC (i.e., the LI-RADS population) and in the general population (i.e., even when LI-RADS algorithms are not applicable). We anticipate that the universal adoption of this lexicon will provide research, educational, and clinical benefits. KEY POINTS: •To standardize terminology, we encourage authors of research and educational materials on liver imaging to use the standardized LI-RADS Lexicon. •We encourage reviewers to promote the use of the standardized LI-RADS Lexicon for publications on liver imaging. •We encourage radiologists to use the standardized LI-RADS Lexicon for liver imaging in clinical care.

Establishing 3D Printing at the Point of Care: Basic Principles and Tools for Success.

As the medical applications of three-dimensional (3D) printing increase, so does the number of health care organizations in which adoption or expansion of 3D printing facilities is under consideration. With recent advancements in 3D printing technology, medical practitioners have embraced this powerful tool to help them to deliver high-quality patient care, with a focus on sustainability. The use of 3D printing in the hospital or clinic at the point of care (POC) has profound potential, but its adoption is not without unanticipated challenges and considerations. The authors provide the basic principles and considerations for building the infrastructure to support 3D printing inside the hospital. This process includes building a business case; determining the requirements for facilities, space, and staff; designing a digital workflow; and considering how electronic health records may have a role in the future. The authors also discuss the supported applications and benefits of medical 3D printing and briefly highlight quality and regulatory considerations. The information presented is meant to be a practical guide to assist radiology departments in exploring the possibilities of POC 3D printing and expanding it from a niche application to a fixture of clinical care. An invited commentary by Ballard is available online. ©RSNA, 2022.

Clinical and Laboratory Findings in Patients With Potential Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Reinfection, May-July 2020.

BACKGROUND: We investigated patients with potential severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reinfection in the United States during May-July 2020. METHODS: We conducted case finding for patients with potential SARS-CoV-2 reinfection through the Emerging Infections Network. Cases reported were screened for laboratory and clinical findings of potential reinfection followed by requests for medical records and laboratory specimens. Available medical records were abstracted to characterize patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical course, and laboratory test results. Submitted specimens underwent further testing, including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), viral culture, whole genome sequencing, subgenomic RNA PCR, and testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibody. RESULTS: Among 73 potential reinfection patients with available records, 30 patients had recurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms explained by alternative diagnoses with concurrent SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR, 24 patients remained asymptomatic after recovery but had recurrent or persistent RT-PCR, and 19 patients had recurrent COVID-19 symptoms with concurrent SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR but no alternative diagnoses. These 19 patients had symptom recurrence a median of 57 days after initial symptom onset (interquartile range: 47-76). Six of these patients had paired specimens available for further testing, but none had laboratory findings confirming reinfections. Testing of an additional 3 patients with recurrent symptoms and alternative diagnoses also did not confirm reinfection. CONCLUSIONS: We did not confirm SARS-CoV-2 reinfection within 90 days of the initial infection based on the clinical and laboratory characteristics of cases in this investigation. Our findings support current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance around quarantine and testing for patients who have recovered from COVID-19.

Epidemiologic Findings from Case Investigations and Contact Tracing for First 200 Cases of Coronavirus Disease, Santa Clara County, California, USA.

In January 2020, Santa Clara County, California, USA, began identifying laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease among residents. County staff conducted case and contact investigations focused on households and collected detailed case demographic, occupation, exposure, and outcome information. We describe the first 200 test-positive cases during January 31-March 20, 2020, to inform future case and contact investigations. Probable infection sources included community transmission (104 cases), known close contact with a confirmed case-patient (66 cases), and travel (30 cases). Disease patterns across race and ethnicity, occupational, and household factors suggested multiple infection risk factors. Disproportionately high percentages of case-patients from racial and ethnic subgroups worked outside the home (Hispanic [86%] and Filipino [100%]); household transmission was more common among persons from Vietnam (53%). Even with the few initial cases, detailed case and contact investigations of household contacts capturing occupational and disaggregated race and ethnicity data helped identify at-risk groups and focused solutions for disease control.

American Society of Emergency Radiology Multicenter Blunt Splenic Trauma Study: CT and Clinical Findings.

Background Treatment of blunt splenic trauma (BST) continues to evolve with improved imaging for detection of splenic vascular injuries. Purpose To report on treatments for BST from 11 trauma centers, the frequency and clinical impact of splenic vascular injuries, and factors influencing treatment. Materials and Methods Patients were retrospectively identified as having BST between January 2011 and December 2018, and clinical, imaging, and outcome data were recorded. Patient data were summarized descriptively, both overall and stratified by initial treatment received (nonoperative management [NOM], angiography, or surgery). Regression analyses were used to examine the primary outcomes of interest, which were initial treatment received and length of stay (LOS). Results This study evaluated 1373 patients (mean age, 42 years ± 18; 845 men). Initial treatments included NOM in 849 patients, interventional radiology (IR) in 240 patients, and surgery in 284 patients. Rates from CT reporting were 22% (304 of 1373) for active splenic hemorrhage (ASH) and 20% (276 of 1373) for contained vascular injury (CVI). IR management of high-grade injuries increased 15.6%, from 28.6% (eight of 28) to 44.2% (57 of 129) (2011-2012 vs 2017-2018). Patients who were treated invasively had a higher injury severity score (odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.05; P < .001), lower temperature (OR, 0.97; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.00; P = .03), and a lower hematocrit (OR, 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93, 0.99; P = .003) and were more likely to show ASH (OR, 8.05; 95% CI: 5.35, 12.26; P < .001) or CVI (OR, 2.70; 95% CI: 1.64, 4.44; P < .001) on CT images, have spleen-only injures (OR, 2.35; 95% CI: 1.45, 3.8; P < .001), and have been administered blood product for fewer than 24 hours (OR, 2.35; 95% CI: 1.58, 3.51; P < .001) compared with those chosen for NOM, after adjusting for key demographic and clinical variables. After adjustment, factors associated with a shorter LOS were female sex (OR, 0.84; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.96; P = .009), spleen-only injury (OR, 0.72; 95% CI: 0.6, 0.86; P < .001), higher admission hematocrit (OR, 0.98; 95% CI: 0.6, 0.86; P < .001), and presence of ASH at CT (OR, 0.74; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.88; P < .001). Conclusion Contained vascular injury and active splenic hemorrhage (ASH) were frequently reported, and rates of interventional radiologic management increased during the study period. ASH was associated with a shorter length of stay, and patients with ASH had eight times the odds of undergoing invasive treatment compared with undergoing nonoperative management. © RSNA, 2021 See also the editorial by Patlas in this issue.

Report of Health Care Provider Recommendation for COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults, by Recipient COVID-19 Vaccination Status and Attitudes - United States, April-September 2021.

Vaccination is critical to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, and health care providers play an important role in achieving high vaccination coverage (1). To examine the prevalence of report of a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination and its association with COVID-19 vaccination coverage and attitudes, CDC analyzed data among adults aged ≥18 years from the National Immunization Survey-Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM), a nationally representative cellular telephone survey. Prevalence of report of a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination among adults increased from 34.6%, during April 22-May 29, to 40.5%, during August 29-September 25, 2021. Adults who reported a provider recommendation for COVID-19 vaccination were more likely to have received ≥1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (77.6%) than were those who did not receive a recommendation (61.9%) (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.12). Report of a provider recommendation was associated with concern about COVID-19 (aPR = 1.31), belief that COVID-19 vaccines are important to protect oneself (aPR = 1.15), belief that COVID-19 vaccination was very or completely safe (aPR = 1.17), and perception that many or all of their family and friends had received COVID-19 vaccination (aPR = 1.19). Empowering health care providers to recommend vaccination to their patients could help reinforce confidence in, and increase coverage with, COVID-19 vaccines, particularly among groups known to have lower COVID-19 vaccination coverage, including younger adults, racial/ethnic minorities, and rural residents.

Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Among Health Care Personnel Working in Long-Term Care Facilities, by Job Category, National Healthcare Safety Network - United States, March 2021.

Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and health care personnel (HCP) working in these facilities are at high risk for COVID-19-associated mortality. As of March 2021, deaths among LTCF residents and HCP have accounted for almost one third (approximately 182,000) of COVID-19-associated deaths in the United States (1). Accordingly, LTCF residents and HCP were prioritized for early receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and were targeted for on-site vaccination through the federal Pharmacy Partnership for Long-Term Care Program (2). In December 2020, CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) launched COVID-19 vaccination modules, which allow U.S. LTCFs to voluntarily submit weekly facility-level COVID-19 vaccination data.* CDC analyzed data submitted during March 1-April 4, 2021, to describe COVID-19 vaccination coverage among a convenience sample of HCP working in LTCFs, by job category, and compare HCP vaccination coverage rates with social vulnerability metrics of the surrounding community using zip code tabulation area (zip code area) estimates. Through April 4, 2021, a total of 300 LTCFs nationwide, representing approximately 1.8% of LTCFs enrolled in NHSN, reported that 22,825 (56.8%) of 40,212 HCP completed COVID-19 vaccination.† Vaccination coverage was highest among physicians and advanced practice providers (75.1%) and lowest among nurses (56.7%) and aides (45.6%). Among aides (including certified nursing assistants, nurse aides, medication aides, and medication assistants), coverage was lower in facilities located in zip code areas with higher social vulnerability (social and structural factors associated with adverse health outcomes), corresponding to vaccination disparities present in the wider community (3). Additional efforts are needed to improve LTCF immunization policies and practices, build confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and promote COVID-19 vaccination. CDC and partners have prepared education and training resources to help educate HCP and promote COVID-19 vaccination coverage among LTCF staff members.§.

Pancreatic Trauma: Imaging Review and Management Update.

Traumatic injuries of the pancreas are uncommon and often difficult to diagnose owing to subtle imaging findings, confounding multiorgan injuries, and nonspecific clinical signs. Nonetheless, early diagnosis and treatment are critical, as delays increase morbidity and mortality. Imaging has a vital role in diagnosis and management. A high index of suspicion, as well as knowledge of the anatomy, mechanism of injury, injury grade, and role of available imaging modalities, is required for prompt accurate diagnosis. CT is the initial imaging modality of choice, although the severity of injury can be underestimated and assessment of the pancreatic duct is limited with this modality. The time from injury to definitive diagnosis and the treatment of potential pancreatic duct injury are the primary factors that determine outcome following pancreatic trauma. Disruption of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) is associated with higher rates of complications, such as abscess, fistula, and pseudoaneurysm, and is the primary cause of pancreatic injury-related mortality. Although CT findings can suggest pancreatic duct disruption according to the depth of parenchymal injury, MR cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography facilitate direct assessment of the MPD. Management of traumatic pancreatic injury depends on multiple factors, including mechanism of injury, injury grade, presence (or absence) of vascular injury, hemodynamic status of the patient, and associated organ damage. ©RSNA, 2020 See discussion on this article by Patlas.

Traumatic abdominal wall injuries-a primer for radiologists.

Traumatic abdominal wall injuries encompass a broad clinical and radiological spectrum and are identified in approximately 9% of blunt trauma patients. The most severe form of abdominal wall injury-a traumatic abdominal wall hernia-is seen in less than 1.5% of blunt abdominal trauma patients. However, the incidence of concurrent intra-abdominal injuries in these patients is high and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Although the diagnosis of abdominal wall injuries is typically straight forward on CT, associated injuries may distract the interpreting radiologist in more subtle cases. Thus, it is important for the radiologist to identify abdominal wall injuries and their associated injuries on admission CT, as these injuries typically require surgical correction early in the course of their management. Untreated abdominal wall injuries subject the patient to increased risk of delayed bowel incarceration and strangulation. Therefore, it is important for the radiologist to be knowledgeable of injuries to the abdominal wall and commonly associated injuries to provide optimal patient triage and expedite management.

Update: Characteristics of Health Care Personnel with COVID-19 - United States, February 12-July 16, 2020.

As of September 21, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had resulted in 6,786,352 cases and 199,024 deaths in the United States.* Health care personnel (HCP) are essential workers at risk for exposure to patients or infectious materials (1). The impact of COVID-19 on U.S. HCP was first described using national case surveillance data in April 2020 (2). Since then, the number of reported HCP with COVID-19 has increased tenfold. This update describes demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, stratified by vital status, among 100,570 HCP with COVID-19 reported to CDC during February 12-July 16, 2020. HCP occupation type and job setting are newly reported. HCP status was available for 571,708 (22%) of 2,633,585 cases reported to CDC. Most HCP with COVID-19 were female (79%), aged 16-44 years (57%), not hospitalized (92%), and lacked all 10 underlying medical conditions specified on the case report form† (56%). Of HCP with COVID-19, 641 died. Compared with nonfatal COVID-19 HCP cases, a higher percentage of fatal cases occurred in males (38% versus 22%), persons aged ≥65 years (44% versus 4%), non-Hispanic Asians (Asians) (20% versus 9%), non-Hispanic Blacks (Blacks) (32% versus 25%), and persons with any of the 10 underlying medical conditions specified on the case report form (92% versus 41%). From a subset of jurisdictions reporting occupation type or job setting for HCP with COVID-19, nurses were the most frequently identified single occupation type (30%), and nursing and residential care facilities were the most common job setting (67%). Ensuring access to personal protective equipment (PPE) and training, and practices such as universal use of face masks at work, wearing masks in the community, and observing social distancing remain critical strategies to protect HCP and those they serve.

Characteristics of Persons Who Died with COVID-19 - United States, February 12-May 18, 2020.

During January 1, 2020-May 18, 2020, approximately 1.3 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 83,000 COVID-19-associated deaths were reported in the United States (1). Understanding the demographic and clinical characteristics of decedents could inform medical and public health interventions focused on preventing COVID-19-associated mortality. This report describes decedents with laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, using data from 1) the standardized CDC case-report form (case-based surveillance) (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/reporting-pui.html) and 2) supplementary data (supplemental surveillance), such as underlying medical conditions and location of death, obtained through collaboration between CDC and 16 public health jurisdictions (15 states and New York City).

Self-reported Cannabis Use and Changes in Body Mass Index, CD4 T-Cell Counts, and HIV-1 RNA Suppression in Treated Persons with HIV.

Cannabis use is prevalent among HIV-positive persons, but evidence regarding the impact of cannabis in HIV-positive persons is limited. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of HIV-positive adults initiating their first antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimen. A dedicated intake form assessed self-reported cannabis use in the preceding 7 days at each visit. The relationships between time-varying cannabis use and body mass index (BMI), CD4+ T-cell count, and HIV-1 RNA levels were assessed using random effects models adjusted for age, sex, race, and other reported substance use. 4290 patient-visits from 2008 to 2011 were available from 1010 patients. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in CD4+ T-cell count and BMI across multiple adjusted models using different measures of cannabis use (ever use during the study period, any use, and number of times used in the preceding 7 days). Cannabis use by all three measures was associated with greater odds of having a detectable viral load at a given visit than no reported use (OR 2.02, 1.72, and 1.08, respectively; all adjusted p < 0.05). Self-reported cannabis use was not associated with changes in BMI or CD4+ T-cell count in ART-naïve HIV-positive persons starting treatment. However, reported cannabis use by multiple categories was associated with having a detectable HIV-1 RNA during the study period. Associations between cannabis use, adherence, and HIV-related outcomes merit further study.

Minimal Aortic Injury: Mechanisms, Imaging Manifestations, Natural History, and Management.

Over the last 2 decades, increased depiction of minimal aortic injury (MAI) in the evaluation of patients who have sustained trauma has mirrored the increased utilization and improved resolution of multidetector CT. MAI represents a mild form of blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) that usually resolves or stabilizes with pharmacologic management. The traditional imaging manifestation of MAI is a subcentimeter round, triangular, or linear aortic filling defect attached to an aortic wall, representing a small intimal flap or thrombus consistent with grade I injury according to the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS). Small intramural hematoma (SVS grade II injury) without external aortic contour deformity is included in the MAI spectrum in several BTAI classifications on the basis of its favorable outcome. Although higher SVS grades of injury generally call for endovascular repair, there is growing literature supporting conservative management for small pseudoaneurysms (SVS grade III) and large intimal flaps (>1 cm, unclassified by the SVS), hinting toward possible future inclusion of these entities in the MAI spectrum. Injury progression of MAI is rare, with endovascular aortic repair reserved for these patients as well as patients for whom medical treatment cannot be implemented. No consensus on the predetermined frequency and duration of multidetector CT follow-up exists, but it is common practice to perform a repeat CT examination shortly after the initial diagnosis. The authors review the evolving definition, pathophysiology, and natural history of MAI, present the primary and secondary imaging findings and diagnostic pitfalls, and discuss the current management options for MAI. Online DICOM image stacks are available for this article. ©RSNA, 2020.

Association Between Sarcopenia and AFP Level in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is one of the most common complications of cirrhosis. Liver transplantation (LT) is the treatment of choice for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that are unsuitable for resection. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 163 patients transplanted at our institution with HCC from 1998 to 2016. Sarcopenia was diagnosed based on the skeletal muscle mass on computed tomography imaging using SliceOmatic 5.0 software at L3 level (≤52.4 cm2/m2 in males and ≤38.5 cm2/m2 in females). RESULTS: From the 163 patients who underwent LT for HCC, 119 had available computed tomography scan. From those, 61 were identified as sarcopenic by lumbar skeletal muscle index (LSMI), of which 53 patients were male (86.9%) with a median age of 59 y (56-64). The most common etiologies of cirrhosis were hepatitis C virus infection (55.7%) and alcohol liver disease (46.7%). A multivariable analysis was performed to find predictors of sarcopenia. Alpha-fetoprotein level >100 mg/dL (OR, 6.577; 95% CI: 1.370-51.464; P = 0.034) and gender (male) (OR, 5.878; 95% CI: 1.987-20.054; P = 0.002) were independently associated with the presence of sarcopenia in this cohort. Patients in the lowest quartile for LSMI had prolonged length of stay compared to the rest of the patients (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Alpha-fetoprotein level >100 mg/dL is associated with almost 6-fold increased risk of sarcopenia in patients with HCC undergoing LT. Patients in the lowest quartile of the LSMI are associated with 70% increased risk of prolonged length of stay in this cohort.