Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of noncontrast MRI in the evaluation of suspected appendiceal abscesses in children.

BACKGROUND: Noncontrast MRI has been shown to be feasible in children with postappendectomy abscesses and helps guide clinical management, but its role in preoperative appendiceal abscesses is unclear. PURPOSE: To determine the cost-effectiveness and impact on clinical management of noncontrast MRI in pediatric patients with suspected appendiceal abscess, both pre- and postappendectomy. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective cohort study. POPULATION: In all, 82 children under the age of 18 years with suspected appendiceal abscess on ultrasound. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Diffusion-weighted imaging and T2 -weighted single-shot fast spin-echo imaging of the abdomen and pelvis at 1.5T and 3T. ASSESSMENT: The presence, location, size, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of fluid collections and the presence of a drainage path was noted by three pediatric radiologists. Imaging time, completeness of the exam, and impact on clinical management was recorded. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for MRI relative to CT, taking into account hospital charges, radiation exposure, and risk of adverse reaction to iodinated contrast. STATISTICAL TESTS: Descriptive statistics were used. Intraclass correlation coefficient and Fleiss' kappa were used to assess interobserver variation. Proportions were compared using Fisher's exact test (statistical significance at P < 0.05). RESULTS: MRI confirmed the presence of collections in most cases, with alternative diagnosis established in 10 patients (Tubo-ovarian abscess n = 7, Crohn's disease, ileal anastomotic leak, and Birkitts lymphoma each n = 1). MRI showed the presence of a safe drainage pathway in 92-97% of pelvic abscesses and 86-98% of abdominal abscesses compared with 7-10% and 75-81%, respectively, for ultrasound. MR was cost-effective compared with CT, taking into account the direct charges, risk of radiation induced cancer, and adverse reaction to iodinated contrast. DATA CONCLUSION: Noncontrast MR is cost-effective and affects clinical management in a significant proportion of children with suspected appendiceal abscesses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 6 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019.

Patient values and preferences on polypharmacy and deprescribing: a scoping review.

Background Understanding how patient values and preferences towards polypharmacy and deprescribing have been studied is important to gain insight on current knowledge in this area and to identify knowledge gaps. Aim To describe methods and outcomes for studying patient values and preferences towards polypharmacy and deprescribing, and to identify gaps in the existing literature. Method A scoping review was conducted on English-language studies that examined patient preferences and values related to polypharmacy and/or deprescribing among community-dwelling adults. MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, EconLit, Social Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and CINAHL/AgeLine were searched. Results Thirty articles were included. Surveys (n = 17, 56.7%), interviews/focus groups (n = 9, 30.0%), and mixed methods (n = 3, 10.0%), were commonly used methods. Patients Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (PATD) was the most common tool used (n = 9, 30.0%). Twelve themes related to attitudes, social pressure, and control of polypharmacy/deprescribing were identified. The most frequently-encountered themes included desire or willingness to reduce medication load and influence of healthcare provider on medication use. Conclusion PATD was commonly used to assess preferences and values towards polypharmacy and limited knowledge on patient-important outcomes were addressed. Future research should focus on shared decision-making and communicating risk versus benefit of medications.

Breast Cancer Screening in High-Risk Patients during Pregnancy and Breastfeeding: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

There are currently no clear guidelines for high-risk breast cancer screening during the pregnancy and breastfeeding periods. The objective of this systematic review (SR) was to assess the available evidence pertaining to breast cancer screening recommendations in this population with the aim of supporting future guidelines. We performed a SR of the literature using the electronic databases MEDLINE and Embase. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used during the abstract screening and full-text data extraction phases. We retrieved 2,274 abstracts after removal of duplicates, from which 16 studies were included based on predetermined eligibility criteria. Most of the studies found were narrative reviews and expert opinions. Clinical breast exam (CBE) was recommended by 12 studies during pregnancy and by 6 studies in the breastfeeding period. Mammography was recommended in the breastfeeding period by 2 studies. Magnetic resonance imaging was recommended in the breastfeeding period by 2 studies. Ultrasound was considered not appropriate for screening in this population. The information extracted from this SR is based primarily on expert opinion and anecdotal evidence, which explains the lack of standardized guidelines for high-risk breast cancer screening in this population. However, expert opinion may be a surrogate outcome for high-risk breast cancer screening recommendations in this subset of patients, and as such, may justify the clinical management to be tailored accordingly. This SR summarizes the evidence pertaining to high-risk breast cancer screening during pregnancy and breastfeeding, which could serve as a catalyst for future research on the topic.