Event-Based Clinical Finding Extraction from Radiology Reports with Pre-trained Language Model.

Radiology reports contain a diverse and rich set of clinical abnormalities documented by radiologists during their interpretation of the images. Comprehensive semantic representations of radiological findings would enable a wide range of secondary use applications to support diagnosis, triage, outcomes prediction, and clinical research. In this paper, we present a new corpus of radiology reports annotated with clinical findings. Our annotation schema captures detailed representations of pathologic findings that are observable on imaging ("lesions") and other types of clinical problems ("medical problems"). The schema used an event-based representation to capture fine-grained details, including assertion, anatomy, characteristics, size, and count. Our gold standard corpus contained a total of 500 annotated computed tomography (CT) reports. We extracted triggers and argument entities using two state-of-the-art deep learning architectures, including BERT. We then predicted the linkages between trigger and argument entities (referred to as argument roles) using a BERT-based relation extraction model. We achieved the best extraction performance using a BERT model pre-trained on 3 million radiology reports from our institution: 90.9-93.4% F1 for finding triggers and 72.0-85.6% F1 for argument roles. To assess model generalizability, we used an external validation set randomly sampled from the MIMIC Chest X-ray (MIMIC-CXR) database. The extraction performance on this validation set was 95.6% for finding triggers and 79.1-89.7% for argument roles, demonstrating that the model generalized well to the cross-institutional data with a different imaging modality. We extracted the finding events from all the radiology reports in the MIMIC-CXR database and provided the extractions to the research community.

A Method for Reducing Variability Across Dual-Energy CT Manufacturers in Quantification of Low Iodine Content Levels.

BACKGROUND. Clinical use of the dual-energy CT (DECT) iodine quantification technique is hindered by between-platform (i.e., across different manufacturers) variability in iodine concentration (IC) values, particularly at low iodine levels. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to develop in an anthropomorphic phantom a method for reducing between-platform variability in quantification of low iodine content levels using DECT and to evaluate the method's performance in patients undergoing serial clinical DECT examinations on different platforms. METHODS. An anthropomorphic phantom in three body sizes, incorporating varied lesion types and scanning conditions, was imaged with three distinct DECT implementations from different manufacturers at varying radiation exposures. A cross-platform iodine quantification model for correcting between-platform variability at low iodine content was developed using the phantom data. The model was tested in a retrospective series of 30 patients (20 men, 10 women; median age, 62 years) who each underwent three serial contrast-enhanced DECT examinations of the abdomen and pelvis (90 scans total) for routine oncology surveillance using the same three DECT platforms as in the phantom. Estimated accuracy of phantom IC values was summarized using root-mean-square error (RMSE) relative to known IC. Between-platform variability in patients was summarized using root-mean-square deviation (RMSD). RMSE and RMSD were compared between platform-based IC (ICPB) and cross-platform IC (ICCP). ICPB was normalized to aorta and portal vein. RESULTS. In the phantom study, mean RMSE of ICPB across platforms and other experimental conditions was 0.65 ± 0.18 mg I/mL compared with 0.40 ± 0.08 mg I/mL for ICCP (38% decrease in mean RMSE; p < .05). Intrapatient between-platform variability across serial DECT examinations was higher for ICPB than ICCP (RMSD, 97% vs 88%; p < .001). Between-platform variability was not reduced by normalization of ICPB to aorta (RMSD, 97% vs 101%; p = .12) or portal vein (RMSD, 97% vs 97%; p = .81). CONCLUSION. The developed cross-platform method significantly decreased between-platform variability occurring at low iodine content with platform-based DECT iodine quantification. CLINICAL IMPACT. With further validation, the cross-platform method, which has been implemented as a web-based app, may expand clinical use of DECT iodine quantification, yielding meaningful IC values that reflect tissue biologic viability or treatment response in patients who undergo serial examinations on different platforms.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding at CT Angiography and CT Enterography: Imaging Atlas and Glossary of Terms.

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common potentially life-threatening medical condition frequently requiring multidisciplinary collaboration to reach the proper diagnosis and guide management. GI bleeding can be overt (eg, visible hemorrhage such as hematemesis, hematochezia, or melena) or occult (eg, positive fecal occult blood test or iron deficiency anemia). Upper GI bleeding, which originates proximal to the ligament of Treitz, is more common than lower GI bleeding, which arises distal to the ligament of Treitz. Small bowel bleeding accounts for 5-10% of GI bleeding cases commonly manifesting as obscure GI bleeding, where the source remains unknown after complete GI tract endoscopic and imaging evaluation. CT can aid in identifying the location and cause of bleeding and is an important complementary tool to endoscopy, nuclear medicine, and angiography in evaluating patients with GI bleeding. For radiologists, interpreting CT scans in patients with GI bleeding can be challenging owing to the large number of images and the diverse potential causes of bleeding. The purpose of this pictorial review by the Society of Abdominal Radiology GI Bleeding Disease-Focused Panel is to provide a practical resource for radiologists interpreting GI bleeding CT studies that reviews the proper GI bleeding terminology, the most common causes of GI bleeding, key patient history and risk factors, the optimal CT imaging technique, and guidelines for case interpretation and illustrates many common causes of GI bleeding. A CT reporting template is included to help generate radiology reports that can add value to patient care. An invited commentary by Al Hawary is available online. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2021.

Determining Follow-Up Imaging Study Using Radiology Reports.

Radiology reports often contain follow-up imaging recommendations. Failure to comply with these recommendations in a timely manner can lead to delayed treatment, poor patient outcomes, complications, unnecessary testing, lost revenue, and legal liability. The objective of this study was to develop a scalable approach to automatically identify the completion of a follow-up imaging study recommended by a radiologist in a preceding report. We selected imaging-reports containing 559 follow-up imaging recommendations and all subsequent reports from a multi-hospital academic practice. Three radiologists identified appropriate follow-up examinations among the subsequent reports for the same patient, if any, to establish a ground-truth dataset. We then trained an Extremely Randomized Trees that uses recommendation attributes, study meta-data and text similarity of the radiology reports to determine the most likely follow-up examination for a preceding recommendation. Pairwise inter-annotator F-score ranged from 0.853 to 0.868; the corresponding F-score of the classifier in identifying follow-up exams was 0.807. Our study describes a methodology to automatically determine the most likely follow-up exam after a follow-up imaging recommendation. The accuracy of the algorithm suggests that automated methods can be integrated into a follow-up management application to improve adherence to follow-up imaging recommendations. Radiology administrators could use such a system to monitor follow-up compliance rates and proactively send reminders to primary care providers and/or patients to improve adherence.

Automated Tracking of Follow-Up Imaging Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE. Radiology reports often contain follow-up imaging recommendations. Failure to comply with these recommendations in a timely manner can lead to poor patient outcomes, complications, and legal liability. As such, the primary objective of this research was to determine adherence rates to follow-up recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Radiology-related examination data, including report text, for examinations performed between June 1, 2015, and July 31, 2017, were extracted from the radiology departments at the University of Washington (UW) and Lahey Hospital and Medical Center (LHMC). The UW dataset contained 923,885 examinations, and the LHMC dataset contained 763,059 examinations. A 1-year period was used for detection of imaging recommendations and up to 14-months for the follow-up examination to be performed. RESULTS. On the basis of an algorithm with 97.9% detection accuracy, the follow-up imaging recommendation rate was 11.4% at UW and 20.9% at LHMC. Excluding mammography examinations, the overall follow-up imaging adherence rate was 51.9% at UW (range, 44.4% for nuclear medicine to 63.0% for MRI) and 52.0% at LHMC (range, 30.1% for fluoroscopy to 63.2% for ultrasound) using a matcher algorithm with 76.5% accuracy. CONCLUSION. This study suggests that follow-up imaging adherence rates vary by modality and between sites. Adherence rates can be influenced by various legitimate factors. Having the capability to identify patients who can benefit from patient engagement initiatives is important to improve overall adherence rates. Monitoring of follow-up adherence rates over time and critical evaluation of variation in recommendation patterns across the practice can inform measures to standardize and help mitigate risk.

Repeat CT Performed Within One Month of CT Conducted in the Emergency Department for Abdominal Pain: A Secondary Analysis of Data From a Prospective Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine both the frequency of repeat CT performed within 1 month after a patient visits the emergency department (ED) and undergoes CT evaluation for abdominal pain and the frequency of worsened or new CT-based diagnoses. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Secondary analysis was performed on data collected during a prospective multicenter study. The parent study included patients who underwent CT in the ED for abdominal pain between 2012 and 2014, and these patients constituted the study group of the present analysis. The proportion of patients who underwent (in any setting) repeat abdominal CT within 1 month of the index CT examination was calculated. For each of these patients, results of the index and repeat CT scans were compared by an independent panel and categorized as follows: no change (group 1); same process, improved (group 2); same process, worse (group 3); or different process (group 4). The proportion of patients in groups 1 and 2 versus groups 3 and 4 was calculated, and patient and ED physician characteristics were compared. RESULTS: The parent study included 544 patients (246 of whom were men [45%]; mean patient age, 49.4 years). Of those 544 patients, 53 (10%; 95% CI, 7.5-13%) underwent repeat abdominal CT. Patients' CT comparisons were categorized as follows: group 1 for 43% of patients (23/53), group 2 for 26% (14/53), group 3 for 15% (8/53), and group 4 for 15% (8/53). New or worse findings were present in 30% of patients (16/53) (95% CI, 19-44%). When patients with findings in groups 1 and 2 were compared to patients with findings in groups 3 and 4, no significant difference was noted in patient age (p = 0.25) or sex (p = 0.76), the number of days between scans (p = 0.98), and the diagnostic confidence of the ED physician after the index CT scan was obtained (p = 0.33). CONCLUSION: Short-term, repeat abdominal CT was performed for 10% of patients who underwent CT in the ED for abdominal pain, and it yielded new or worse findings for 30% of those patients.

Clinical and Payer-Based Analysis of Value of Dual-Energy Computed Tomography for Workup of Incidental Abdominal Findings.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a clinical and payer-based analysis of the value of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) for workup of incidental abdominal findings. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospectively designed, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study approved by our institutional review board. Sixty-nine examinations in 69 patients (45 men, 24 women; mean age, 57.7 years) who underwent single-phase postcontrast abdominal DECT studies between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017, were included. Two radiologists, blinded to study objective and design, reviewed all cases and identified incidental abdominal findings needing further imaging. All incidental findings were reviewed by 2 other investigators, who determined whether an imaging-based diagnosis could be made using DECT virtual noncontrast images and iodine maps. Additional studies and associated payer-reimbursement amounts avoided by use of DECT were estimated. All imaging costs were estimated based on the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reimbursement amounts. RESULTS: Thirty-four incidental findings (renal mass, n = 20; adrenal nodule, n = 8; pancreatic cystic lesions, n = 3; others, n = 3) were identified in 19 (27.5%) of 69 patients. Dual-energy computed tomography characterized 27 incidental findings in 15 patients and accounted for cost savings of 15 additional imaging examinations (abdominal magnetic resonance imaging, n = 11; abdominal computed tomography, n = 4). Based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reimbursement amounts, we estimated that, by abolishing the need for additional imaging use, DECT saved US $84.95 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-energy computed tomography can provide an imaging-based diagnosis of incidental abdominal findings, otherwise incompletely characterized on routine abdominal computed tomography, in approximately 21% of patients. In select patients, the monetary savings from abolishing additional imaging may reduce payer costs associated with use of DECT.

Automatic Normalization of Anatomical Phrases in Radiology Reports Using Unsupervised Learning.

In today's radiology workflow, free-text reporting is established as the most common medium to capture, store, and communicate clinical information. Radiologists routinely refer to prior radiology reports of a patient to recall critical information for new diagnosis, which is quite tedious, time consuming, and prone to human error. Automatic structuring of report content is desired to facilitate such inquiry of information. In this work, we propose an unsupervised machine learning approach to automatically structure radiology reports by detecting and normalizing anatomical phrases based on the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) ontology. The proposed approach combines word embedding-based semantic learning with ontology-based concept mapping to derive the desired concept normalization. The word embedding model was trained using a large corpus of unlabeled radiology reports. Fifty-six anatomical labels were extracted from SNOMED CT as class labels of the whole human anatomy. The proposed framework was compared against a number of state-of-the-art supervised and unsupervised approaches. Radiology reports from three different clinical sites were manually labeled for testing. The proposed approach outperformed other techniques yielding an average precision of 82.6%. The proposed framework boosts the coverage and performance of conventional approaches for concept normalization, by applying word embedding techniques in semantic learning, while avoiding the challenge of having access to a large amount of annotated data, which is typically required for training classifiers.

CT Detectability of Small Low-Contrast Hypoattenuating Focal Lesions: Iterative Reconstructions versus Filtered Back Projection.

Purpose To investigate performance in detectability of small (≤1 cm) low-contrast hypoattenuating focal lesions by using filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms from two major CT vendors across a range of 11 radiation exposures. Materials and Methods A low-contrast detectability phantom consisting of 21 low-contrast hypoattenuating focal objects (seven sizes between 2.4 and 10.0 mm, three contrast levels) embedded into a liver-equivalent background was scanned at 11 radiation exposures (volume CT dose index range, 0.5-18.0 mGy; size-specific dose estimate [SSDE] range, 0.8-30.6 mGy) with four high-end CT platforms. Data sets were reconstructed by using FBP and varied strengths of image-based, model-based, and hybrid IRs. Sixteen observers evaluated all data sets for lesion detectability by using a two-alternative-forced-choice (2AFC) paradigm. Diagnostic performances were evaluated by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and by performing noninferiority analyses. Results At benchmark exposure, FBP yielded a mean AUC of 0.79 ± 0.09 (standard deviation) across all platforms which, on average, was approximately 2% lower than that observed with the different IR algorithms, which showed an average AUC of 0.81 ± 0.09 (P = .12). Radiation decreases of 30%, 50%, and 80% resulted in similar declines of observer detectability with FBP (mean AUC decrease, -0.02 ± 0.05, -0.03 ± 0.05, and -0.05 ± 0.05, respectively) and all IR methods investigated (mean AUC decrease, -0.00 ± 0.05, -0.04 ± 0.05, and -0.04 ± 0.05, respectively). For each radiation level and CT platform, variance in performance across observers was greater than that across reconstruction algorithms (P = .03). Conclusion Iterative reconstruction algorithms have limited radiation optimization potential in detectability of small low-contrast hypoattenuating focal lesions. This task may be further complicated by a high degree of variation in radiologists' performances, seemingly exceeding real performance differences among reconstruction algorithms. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

3D true-phase polarity recovery with independent phase estimation using three-tier stacks based region growing (3D-TRIPS).

OBJECTIVES: A postprocessing technique termed 3D true-phase polarity recovery with independent phase estimation using three-tier stacks based region growing (3D-TRIPS) was developed, which directly reconstructs phase-sensitive inversion-recovery images without acquisition of phase-reference images. The utility of this technique is demonstrated in myocardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A data structure with three tiers of stacks was used for 3D-TRIPS to directly achieve reliable region growing for successful background-phase estimation. Fifteen patients undergoing postgadolinium 3D phase-sensitive inversion recovery (PSIR) cardiac LGE magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were recruited, and 3D-TRIPS LGE reconstructions were compared with standard PSIR. Objective voxel-by-voxel comparison was performed. Additionally, blinded review by two radiologists compared scar visibility, clinical acceptability, voxel polarity error, or groups and blurring. RESULTS: 3D-TRIPS efficiently reconstructed postcontrast phase-sensitive myocardial LGE images. Objective analysis showed an average 95% voxel-by-voxel agreement between 3D-TRIPS and PSIR images. Blinded radiologist review demonstrated similar image quality between 3D-TRIPS and PSIR reconstruction. CONCLUSION: 3D-TRIPS provided similar image quality to PSIR for phase-sensitive myocardial LGE MRI reconstruction. 3D-TRIPS does not require acquisition of a reference image and can therefore be used to accelerate phase-sensitive LGE imaging.

A review of split-bolus single-pass CT in the assessment of trauma patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review and compare the image quality and radiation dose of split-bolus single-pass computed tomography(CT) in the assessment of trauma patients in comparison to standard multi-phase CT techniques. METHODS: An online electronic database was searched using the MESH terms "split-bolus," "dual phase," and "single pass." Inclusion criteria required the research article to compare a split contrast bolus protocol in a single-pass scan in the assessment of trauma patients. Studies using split-bolus CT technique in non-traumatic injury assessment were excluded. Six articles met the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Parenchymal and vascular image qualities, as well as subjective image quality assessments, were equal or superior in comparison to non-split-bolus multi-phase trauma CT protocols. Split-bolus single-pass CT decreased radiation exposure in all studies. Further research is required to determine the superior split-bolus protocol and the specificity and sensitivity of detecting blunt cerebrovascular injury screening, splenic parenchymal vascular lesions, and characterization of pelvic vascular extravasation.

Role of CT in the Diagnosis of Nonspecific Abdominal Pain: A Multicenter Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine whether specific patient and physician factors-known before CT-are associated with a diagnosis of nonspecific abdominal pain (NSAP) after CT in the emergency department (ED). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed data originally collected in a prospective multicenter study. In the parent study, we identified ED patients referred to CT for evaluation of abdominal pain. We surveyed their physicians before and after CT to identify changes in leading diagnoses, diagnostic confidence, and admission decisions. In the current study, we conducted a multiple regression analysis to identify whether the following were associated with a post-CT diagnosis of NSAP: patient age; patient sex; physicians' years of experience; physicians' pre-CT diagnostic confidence; and physicians' pre-CT admission decision if CT had not been available. We analyzed patients with and those without a pre-CT diagnosis of NSAP separately. For the sensitivity analysis, we excluded patients with different physicians before and after CT. RESULTS: In total, 544 patients were included: 10% (52/544) with a pre-CT diagnosis of NSAP and 90% (492/544) with a pre-CT diagnosis other than NSAP. The leading diagnoses changed after CT in a large proportion of patients with a pre-CT diagnosis of NSAP (38%, 20/52). In regression analysis, we found that physicians' pre-CT diagnostic confidence was inversely associated with a post-CT diagnosis of NSAP in patients with a pre-CT diagnosis other than NSAP (p = 0.0001). No other associations were significant in both primary and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: With the exception of physicians' pre-CT diagnostic confidence, the factors evaluated were not associated with a post-CT diagnosis of NSAP.

CT in the Emergency Department: A Real-Time Study of Changes in Physician Decision Making.

PURPOSE: To determine how physicians' diagnoses, diagnostic uncertainty, and management decisions are affected by the results of computed tomography (CT) in emergency department settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA. Data were collected between July 12, 2012, and January 13, 2014. The requirement to obtain patient consent was waived. In this prospective, four-center study, patients presenting to the emergency department who were referred for CT with abdominal pain, chest pain and/or dyspnea, or headache were identified. Physicians were surveyed before and after CT to determine the leading diagnosis, diagnostic confidence (on a scale of 0% to 100%), alternative "rule out" diagnosis, and management decisions. Primary measures were the proportion of patients for whom the leading diagnosis or admission decision changed and median changes in diagnostic confidence. Secondary measures addressed alternative diagnoses and return-to-care visits (eg, to emergency department) at 1-month follow-up. Regression analysis was used to identify associations between primary measures and site and participant characteristics. RESULTS: Both surveys were completed for 1280 patients by 245 physicians. The leading diagnosis changed in 235 of 460 patients with abdominal pain (51%), 163 of 387 with chest pain and/or dyspnea (42%), and 103 of 433 with headache (24%). Pre-CT diagnostic confidence was inversely associated with the likelihood of a diagnostic change (P < .0001). Median changes in confidence were substantial (increases of 25%, 20%, and 13%, respectively, for patients with abdominal pain, chest pain and/or dyspnea, and headache; P < .0001); median post-CT confidence was high (95% for all three groups). CT helped confirm or exclude at least 95% of alternative diagnoses. Admission decisions changed in 116 of 457 patients with abdominal pain (25%), 72 of 387 with chest pain and/or dyspnea (19%), and 81 of 426 with headache (19%). During follow-up, 70 of 450 patients with abdominal pain (15%), 53 of 387 with chest pain and/or dyspnea (14%), and 49 of 433 with headache (11%) returned for the same indication. In general, changes in leading diagnosis, diagnostic confidence, and admission decisions were not well explained with site or participant characteristics. CONCLUSION: Physicians' diagnoses and admission decisions changed frequently after CT, and diagnostic uncertainty was alleviated.

Call for a new classification system and treatment strategy in blunt aortic injury.

OBJECTIVE: The current Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) classification scheme for blunt aortic injury (BAI) is descriptive but does not guide therapy. We propose a simplified classification scheme based on our robust experience with BAI that is descriptive and guides therapy. METHODS: Patients presenting with BAI between January 1999 and September 2014 were identified from our institution's trauma registry. We divided patients into eras by time. Era 1: before the first United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) device (1999-2005); era 2: FDA-approved TEVAR devices (2005-2010); and era 3: FDA-approved BAI-specific devices (2010-present). Baseline demographic information, Injury Severity Score, hospital details, and survival were collected and compared. Our classification scheme was minimal aortic injury, SVS grade 1 and 2; moderate aortic injury, SVS grade 3; and severe aortic injury, SVS grade 4. RESULTS: We identified 226 patients with a diagnosis of BAI: 75 patients in era 1, 84 in era 2, and 67 in era 3. Mean Injury Severity Score was 39.5 (range, 16-75). The BAI-related in-hospital mortality was significantly higher before endovascular introduction in era 1 (14.6% vs 4.8%; P = .03), but was not significantly different between eras 2 and 3 or before and after BAI-specific devices were introduced (P = .43). Of 146 patients (64.6%) who underwent aortic intervention, 91 underwent endovascular repair, and 55 underwent open repair. All but nine patients (94%) had a moderate or severe injury. Survival across all three eras of patients undergoing operative intervention was 80.2%. Survival in eras 2 and 3 was higher than in era 1 (86.4% vs 73.8%) but was not significant (P = .38). Of 47 patients in eras 2 and 3 with minimal aortic injury, 45 (96%) were managed nonoperatively, with no BAI-related deaths. After 2007, follow-up imaging was obtained in 38 patients (80%) with minimal aortic injury, and progression was not observed. Computed tomography scans showed the injury in 13 patients appeared stable, 19 had complete resolution (50%), and 6 had a decreasing size of injury. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience confirms that BAI-related mortality for patients who survive to presentation is now 5%. From our findings during the past 15 years, we propose simplification of the SVS grading criteria of BAI into minimal, moderate, and severe based on treatment differences among the three groups. Minimal aortic injury can be successfully managed nonoperatively without mandatory follow-up imaging. Moderate aortic injury can be managed semielectively with TEVAR, and severe aortic injury, requires emergency TEVAR.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Postcontrast Acute Kidney Injury in Survivors of Sudden Cardiac Arrest.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Survivors of sudden cardiac arrest may be exposed to iodinated contrast from invasive coronary angiography or contrast-enhanced computed tomography, although the effects on incident acute kidney injury are unknown. The study objective was to determine whether contrast administration within the first 24 hours was associated with acute kidney injury in survivors of sudden cardiac arrest. METHODS: This cohort study, derived from a prospective clinical trial, included patients with sudden cardiac arrest who survived for 48 hours, had no history of end-stage renal disease, and had at least 2 serum creatinine measurements during hospitalization. The contrast group included patients with exposure to iodinated contrast within 24 hours of sudden cardiac arrest. Incident acute kidney injury and first-time dialysis were compared between contrast and no contrast groups and then controlled for known acute kidney injury risk factors. RESULTS: Of the 199 survivors of sudden cardiac arrest, 94 received iodinated contrast. Mean baseline serum creatinine level was 1.3 mg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4 to 1.5 mg/dL) for the contrast group and 1.6 mg/dL (95% CI 1.4 to 1.7 mg/dL) for the no contrast group. Incident acute kidney injury was lower in the contrast group (12.8%) than the no contrast group (17.1%; difference 4.4%; 95% CI -9.2% to 17.5%). Contrast administration was not associated with significant increases in incident acute kidney injury within quartiles of baseline serum creatinine level or after controlling for age, sex, race, congestive heart failure, diabetes, and admission serum creatinine level by regression analysis. Older age was independently associated with acute kidney injury. CONCLUSION: Despite elevated baseline serum creatinine level in most survivors of sudden cardiac arrest, iodinated contrast administration was not associated with incident acute kidney injury even when other acute kidney injury risk factors were controlled for. Thus, although acute kidney injury is not uncommon among survivors of sudden cardiac arrest, early (<24 hours) contrast administration from imaging procedures did not confer an increased risk for acute kidney injury.

A report on the Academic Emergency Medicine 2015 consensus conference "Diagnostic imaging in the emergency department: a research agenda to optimize utilization".

In May 2015, the Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Diagnostic imaging in the emergency department: a research agenda to optimize utilization" was held. The goal of the conference was to develop a high-priority research agenda regarding emergency diagnostic imaging on which to base future research. In addition to representatives from the Society of Academic Emergency Medicine, the multidisciplinary conference included members of several radiology organizations: American Society for Emergency Radiology, Radiological Society of North America, the American College of Radiology, and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The specific aims of the conference were to (1) understand the current state of evidence regarding emergency department (ED) diagnostic imaging utilization and identify key opportunities, limitations, and gaps in knowledge; (2) develop a consensus-driven research agenda emphasizing priorities and opportunities for research in ED diagnostic imaging; and (3) explore specific funding mechanisms available to facilitate research in ED diagnostic imaging. Through a multistep consensus process, participants developed targeted research questions for future research in six content areas within emergency diagnostic imaging: clinical decision rules; use of administrative data; patient-centered outcomes research; training, education, and competency; knowledge translation and barriers to imaging optimization; and comparative effectiveness research in alternatives to traditional computed tomography use.

Geriatric Trauma: A Radiologist's Guide to Imaging Trauma Patients Aged 65 Years and Older.

Radiologists play an important role in evaluation of geriatric trauma patients. Geriatric patients have injury patterns that differ markedly from those seen in younger adults and are susceptible to serious injury from minor trauma. The spectrum of trauma in geriatric patients includes head and spine injury, chest and rib trauma, blunt abdominal injury, pelvic fractures, and extremity fractures. Clinical evaluation of geriatric trauma patients is difficult because of overall frailty, comorbid illness, and medication effects. Specific attention should be focused on the effects of medications in this population, including anticoagulants, steroids, and bisphosphonates. Radiologists should use age-appropriate algorithms for radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging of geriatric trauma patients and follow guidelines for intravenous contrast agent administration in elderly patients with impaired renal function. Because there is less concern about risk for cancer with use of ionizing radiation in this age group, CT is the primary imaging modality used in the setting of geriatric trauma. Clinical examples are provided from the authors' experience at a trauma center where geriatric patients who have sustained major and minor injuries are treated daily.

Enhancement of the pulmonary arteries and thoracic aorta: comparison of a biphasic contrast injection and fixed delay protocol with a monophasic injection and a timing bolus protocol.

The definitive diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, relies on imaging. In this study, we compare the conventional computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) protocol to a double-rule out CT angiogram (DRO CTA) protocol in terms of vascular enhancement, radiation dose, and contrast volume delivered. The CTPA protocol involves injection of a timing bolus for localization of the pulmonary artery, whereas the DRO CTA protocol involves a biphasic contrast. We analyzed 248 consecutive CTPA studies and 242 consecutive DRO CTA studies. Vessel enhancement using region of interest (ROI) measurements, radiation dose delivered, and total contrast volume administered was recorded. The enhancement of all vessels measured was statistically significantly higher with the biphasic DRO CTA protocol than the CTPA protocol. The difference in mean vascular enhancement for the two protocols was greatest in the descending aorta (DA, P < 0.001) and least in the main pulmonary artery (MPA, P = 0.001). The percent of studies with vascular enhancement ≥250 Hounsfield units (HU) was significantly greater in all vascular beds except the MPA when the DRO CTA protocol was used. Studies performed with the DRO CTA protocol led to less radiation exposure and used less contrast than those performed with the CTPA protocol (P < 0.001 for both). According to the final radiology report, 35.08 % of studies in the CTPA group and 22.31 % of studies in the DRO CTA group were considered indeterminate (P = 0.001). In conclusion, the biphasic DRO CTA protocol leads to statistically significantly higher opacification of all pulmonary arterial and aortic vessels studied, with no greater delivery of radiation or contrast, than the monophasic CTPA protocol.

Current concepts in imaging evaluation of penetrating transmediastinal injury.

Penetrating transmediastinal injuries (TMIs) are injuries that traverse the mediastinum. These injuries are most commonly caused by firearms and knives. The investigation and management algorithms for TMI have undergone changes in recent years due to increasing evidence that computed tomography (CT) in useful in the evaluation of hemodynamically stable TMI patients. Initial investigation of TMI patients depends on the question of hemodynamic stability. In unstable patients, imaging (if any) should be limited to bedside radiography and focused ultrasonography. In hemodynamically stable patients in whom a mediastinal trajectory of injury is suspected, the primary imaging modality after radiography should be multidetector CT. CT is invaluable in the assessment of TMI due to its capacity to depict the injury track as well as demonstrate both direct and indirect signs of organ injury. On the basis of the suspected trajectory and specific findings, radiologists can play an essential role in determining future patient management and investigations for each mediastinal organ, thereby expediting appropriate investigation and treatment and avoiding unnecessary and sometimes invasive tests or surgery. The authors provide an up-to-date and evidence-based approach for the management of hemodynamically unstable and stable patients with suspected TMI, discuss management algorithms and CT protocols, and highlight common and uncommon imaging findings and diagnostic pitfalls associated with vascular, cardiac, esophageal, tracheobronchial, pleural, and pulmonary injuries. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Minimal aortic injury of the thoracic aorta: imaging appearances and outcome.

The aim of this study is to describe the frequency, computed tomographic angiography (CTA) imaging appearance, management, and outcome of patients who present with minimal thoracic aortic injury. This retrospective study was Institutional Review Board-approved. Eighty-one patients with blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAI) were identified between 2004 and 2008, comprising 23 patients with minimal aortic injury (MAI) (mean age, 43.2 years ±18.2 years; 12 males and 11 females) and 58 patients with non-minimal aortic injury (mean age, 42.6 years ±22.7 years). CTA imaging was reviewed for each patient to differentiate those with MAI from those with non-MAI BTAI. Inclusion criteria for MAI on CTA were: post-traumatic abnormality of the internal contour of the aorta wall projecting into the lumen, intimal flap, intraluminal filling defect, intramural hematoma, and no evidence of an abnormality to the external contour of the aorta. Relevant follow-up imaging for MAI patients was also reviewed for resolution, stability, or progression of the vascular injury. The electronic medical record of each patient was reviewed and mechanism of injury, injury severity score, associated injuries, type and date of management, outcome, and days from injury to last medical consultation. Minimal aortic injury represented 28.4 % of all BTAI over the study period. Mean injury severity score (37.1), age (43.2 years), and gender did not differ significantly between MAI and non-MAI types of BTAI. Most MAI occurred in the descending thoracic aorta (16/23, 69 %). Without operative or endovascular repair, there was no death or complication due to MAI. One death occurred secondary to MAI (4.4 %) in a patient who underwent endovascular repair and surgical bypass, compared with an overall mortality rate of 8.6 % in the non-MAI BTAI group (p = 0.508). The most common CT appearance of MAI was a rounded or triangular intra-luminal aortic filling detect (18/23 patients, 78 %). In a mean of 466 days of clinical follow-up, no complications were observed in survivors treated without endovascular repair or operation. Minimal aortic injury is identified by multi-detector row CT in more than a quarter of cases of BTAI and has a low mortality. Conservative management is associated with an excellent outcome.