ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Left Lower Quadrant Pain: 2023 Update.

The differential diagnosis for left lower quadrant pain is wide and conditions range from the benign and self-limited to life-threatening surgical emergencies. Along with patient history, physical examination, and laboratory tests, imaging is often critical to limit the differential diagnosis and identify life-threatening abnormalities. This document will discuss the guidelines for the appropriate use of imaging in the initial workup for patients who present with left lower quadrant pain, patients with suspected diverticulitis, and patients with suspected complications from diverticulitis. 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 process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Hernia.

Abdominopelvic hernias are common clinical entities composed of a wide variety of congenital, traumatic, and iatrogenic etiologies. Any weakness in the body wall may result in hernia of cavity contents with concomitant risks of morbidity and mortality. Presentations may be specific, palpable body wall mass/bulge, or vague, nonspecific pain through bowel obstruction. This document focuses on initial imaging of the adult population with signs of symptoms prompting suspicion of abdominopelvic hernia. Imaging of the abdomen and pelvis to evaluate defects is essential for prompt diagnosis and treatment. Often CT and ultrasound are the first-line modalities to quickly evaluate the abdomen and pelvis, providing for accurate diagnoses and management of patients. MRI protocols may be useful as first-line imaging studies, especially in patients with orthopedic instrumentation. Although often performed, abdominal radiographs and fluorographic procedures may provide indirect evidence of hernias but are usually not indicated for initial diagnosis of hernia. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer-reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer-reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Right Lower Quadrant Pain: 2022 Update.

This document focuses on imaging in the adult and pregnant populations with right lower quadrant (RLQ) abdominal pain, including patients with fever and leukocytosis. Appendicitis remains the most common surgical pathology responsible for RLQ abdominal pain in the United States. Other causes of RLQ pain include right colonic diverticulitis, ureteral stone, and infectious enterocolitis. Appropriate imaging in the diagnosis of appendicitis has resulted in decreased negative appendectomy rate from as high as 25% to approximately 1% to 3%. Contrast-enhanced CT remains the primary and most appropriate imaging modality to evaluate this patient population. MRI is approaching CT in sensitivity and specificity as this technology becomes more widely available and utilization increases. Unenhanced MRI and ultrasound remain the diagnostic procedures of choice in the pregnant patient. MRI and ultrasound continue to perform best in the hands of the experts. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer-reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer-reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Staging of Colorectal Cancer: 2021 Update.

Preoperative imaging of rectal carcinoma involves accurate assessment of the primary tumor as well as distant metastatic disease. Preoperative imaging of nonrectal colon cancer is most beneficial in identifying distant metastases, regardless of primary T or N stage. Surgical treatment remains the definitive treatment for colon cancer, while organ-sparing approach may be considered in some rectal cancer patients based on imaging obtained before and after neoadjuvant treatment. 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.

What Is It We Do Here?

We argue radiologists generate most of their value by serving as translators and communicators-linguists skilled in the languages of imaging. The disconnect between these core functions and how radiology practices are paid impedes our efforts to maximize value. We believe more investigation is needed to optimize the fidelity of our translations and the coherence, visibility, and actionability of our communications.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Anorectal Disease.

This review summarizes the relevant literature for the selection of the initial imaging in 4 clinical scenarios in patients with suspected inflammatory disease or postoperative complication of the anorectum. These clinical scenarios include suspected perianal fistula or abscess; rectovesicular or rectovaginal fistula; proctitis or pouchitis; and suspected complication following proctectomy, coloproctectomy, or colectomy with a pouch or other anastomosis. The appropriateness of imaging modalities as they apply to each clinical scenario is rated as usually appropriate, may be appropriate, and usually not appropriate to assist the selection of the most appropriate imaging modality in the corresponding clinical scenarios of anorectal disease. 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.

CT Volumes from 2,398 Radiology Practices in the United States: A Real-Time Indicator of the Effect of COVID-19 on Routine Care, January to September 2020.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on CT volumes in the United States during and after the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: CT volumes from 2,398 US radiology practices participating in the ACR Dose Index Registry from January 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020, were analyzed. Data were compared to projected CT volumes using 2019 normative data and analyzed with respect to time since government orders, population-normalized positive COVID-19 tests, and attributed deaths. Data were stratified by state population density, unemployment status, and race. RESULTS: There were 16,198,830 CT examinations (2,398 practices). Volume nadir occurred an average of 32 days after each state-of-emergency declaration and 12 days after each stay-at-home order. At nadir, the projected volume loss was 38,043 CTs per day (of 71,626 CTs per day; 53% reduction). Over the entire study period, there were 3,689,874 fewer CT examinations performed than predicted (of 18,947,969; 19% reduction). There was less reduction in states with smaller population density (15% [169,378 of 1,142,247; quartile 1] versus 21% [1,894,152 of 9,140,689; quartile 4]) and less reduction in states with a lower insured unemployed proportion (13% [279,331 of 2,071,251; quartile 1] versus 23% [1,753,521 of 7,496,443; quartile 4]). By September 30, CT volume had returned to 84% (59,856 of 71,321) of predicted; recovery of CT volume occurred as positive COVID-19 tests rose and deaths were in decline. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 substantially reduced US CT volume, reflecting delayed and deferred care, especially in states with greater unemployment. Partial volume recovery occurred despite rising positive COVID-19 tests.

ACR Statement on Safe Resumption of Routine Radiology Care During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

The ACR recognizes that radiology practices are grappling with when and how to safely resume routine radiology care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Although it is unclear how long the pandemic will last, it may persist for many months. Throughout this time, it will be important to perform safe, comprehensive, and effective care for patients with and patients without COVID-19, recognizing that asymptomatic transmission is common with this disease. Local idiosyncrasies prevent a single prescriptive strategy. However, general considerations can be applied to most practice environments. A comprehensive strategy will include consideration of local COVID-19 statistics; availability of personal protective equipment; local, state, and federal government mandates; institutional regulatory guidance; local safety measures; health care worker availability; patient and health care worker risk factors; factors specific to the indication(s) for radiology care; and examination or procedure acuity. An accurate risk-benefit analysis of postponing versus performing a given routine radiology examination or procedure often is not possible because of many unknown and complex factors. However, this is the overriding principle: If the risk of illness or death to a health care worker or patient from health care-acquired COVID-19 is greater than the risk of illness or death from delaying radiology care, the care should be delayed; however, if the opposite is true, the radiology care should proceed in a timely fashion.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder.

Placenta accreta spectrum disorder (PASD) is the current terminology recommended by the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) and should replace terms such as abnormally adherent/invasive placenta or morbidly adherent placenta. PASD refers to a variety of potential clinical complications, which may result from abnormal placental implantation. More specifically, placenta accreta refers to a defect in the decidua basalis where the chorionic villi adhere directly to the myometrium with trophoblastic invasion. Accurate antenatal diagnosis is needed to plan for an appropriate delivery strategy at an experienced center in order to reduce maternal and potential fetal morbidity and mortality. Obtaining radiologic and clinical data when PASD is first suspected can play a significant role in formulating an appropriate delivery strategy. Depending on the clinical risk factors and initial imaging findings, transabdominal ultrasound of the pregnant uterus with duplex Doppler and transvaginal ultrasound as needed are the most appropriate imaging procedures. 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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Suspected Small-Bowel Obstruction.

Small-bowel obstruction is a common cause of abdominal pain and accounts for a significant proportion of hospital admissions. Radiologic imaging plays the key role in the diagnosis and management of small-bowel obstruction as neither patient presentation, the clinical examination, nor laboratory testing are sufficiently sensitive or specific enough to diagnose or guide management. This document focuses on the imaging evaluation of the two most commonly encountered clinical scenarios related to small-bowel obstruction: the acute presentation and the more indolent, low-grade, or intermittent presentation. This document hopes to clarify the appropriate utilization of the many imaging procedures that are available and commonly employed in these clinical settings. 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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Crohn Disease.

Three common clinical scenarios involving use of imaging in Crohn disease are covered. These include the initial evaluation of Crohn disease when the diagnosis has not been previously established, the evaluation for anticipated exacerbation of known disease, and the evaluation of disease activity during therapy monitoring. The appropriateness of a given imaging modality for each scenario is rated as one of three categories (usually appropriate, may be appropriate, usually not appropriate) to help guide evaluation. Pediatric presentation of Crohn disease and the appropriateness of imaging are not covered in this document. 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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Dysphagia.

This review summarizes the relevant literature for the initial imaging of patients with symptoms of dysphagia. For patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia who have an underlying attributable cause, a modified barium swallow is usually appropriate for initial imaging but for those who have unexplained dysphagia a fluoroscopic biphasic esophagram is usually appropriate. Fluoroscopic biphasic esophagram is usually appropriate for initial imaging in both immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients who have retrosternal dysphagia. For postoperative patients with dysphagia, fluoroscopic single-contrast esophagram and CT neck and chest with intravenous (IV) contrast are usually appropriate for oropharyngeal or retrosternal dysphagia occurring in the early postoperative period where water-soluble contrast is usually preferred rather than barium sulfate. In the later postoperative period (greater than 1 month), CT neck and chest with IV contrast and fluoroscopic single-contrast esophagram are usually appropriate. 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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Left Lower Quadrant Pain-Suspected Diverticulitis.

This review summarizes the relevant literature regarding imaging of suspected diverticulitis as an etiology for left lower quadrant pain, and imaging of complications of acute diverticulitis. The most common cause of left lower quadrant pain in adults is acute sigmoid or descending colonic diverticulitis. Appropriate imaging triage for patients with suspected diverticulitis should address the differential diagnostic possibilities and what information is necessary to make a definitive management decision. Patients with diverticulitis may require surgery or interventional radiology procedures because of associated complications, including abscesses, fistulas, obstruction, or perforation. As a result, there has been a trend toward greater use of imaging to confirm the diagnosis of diverticulitis, evaluate the extent of disease, and detect complications before deciding on appropriate treatment. Additionally, in the era of bundled payments and minimizing health care costs, patients with acute diverticulitis are being managed on an outpatient basis and rapid diagnostic imaging at the time of initial symptoms helps to streamline and triage patients to the appropriate treatment pathway. 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.

Placenta accreta spectrum: value of placental bulge as a sign of myometrial invasion on MR imaging.

PURPOSE: To evaluate correlation of "placental bulge sign" with myometrial invasion in placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders. Placental bulge is defined as deviation of external uterine contour from expected plane caused by abnormal outward bulge of placental tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this IRB-approved, retrospective study, all patients undergoing MRI for PAS disorders between March 2014 and 2018 were included. Patients who delivered elsewhere were excluded. Imaging was reviewed by 2 independent readers. Surgical pathology from Cesarean hysterectomy or pathology of the delivered placenta was used as reference standard. Fisher's exact and kappa tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients underwent MRI for PAS disorders. Two excluded patients delivered elsewhere. Placental bulge was present in 32 of 34 cases with myometrial invasion [True positive 32/34 = 94% (95% CI 0.80-0.99)]. Placental bulge was absent in 24 of 25 cases of normal placenta or placenta accreta without myometrial invasion [True negative = 24/25, 96% (95% CI 80-99.8%)]. Positive and negative predictive values were 97% and 96%, respectively. Placental bulge in conjunction with other findings of PAS disorder was 100% indicative of myometrial invasion (p < 0.01). Kappa value of 0.87 signified excellent inter-reader concordance. In 1 false positive, placenta itself was normal but the bulge was present. Surgical pathology revealed markedly thinned, fibrotic myometrium without accreta. One false-negative case was imaged at 16 weeks and may have been imaged too early. CONCLUSIONS: Placental bulge in conjunction with other findings of invasive placenta is 100% predictive of myometrial invasion. Using the bulge alone without other signs can lead to false-positive results.

Comparison of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes in a screening and diagnostic CT colonography population.

PURPOSE: To compare the distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes between screening and diagnostic CT colonography (CTC) populations. METHODS: 388 consecutive patients (369 men, 19 women; mean ± SD age 67.8 ± 10 years) who underwent first-time CTC (4/2011-4/2017) at a Veteran's Affairs Medical Center were divided into screening (asymptomatic) or diagnostic (symptomatic) cohorts based on CTC indication. CTC reporting and data system E-scores for extracolonic findings were retrospectively assigned based on prospective CTC radiologic reports. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the association between E-scores and CTC indication. Electronic medical records of all patients with E3 or E4 scores were reviewed (median follow-up 2.8 years) to determine clinical outcomes. RESULTS: 68% (262/388) underwent screening and 32% (126/388) diagnostic CTC. 7.2% (28/388) had extracolonic findings considered potentially significant (E4), 4.4% (17/388) had indeterminate but likely unimportant findings (E3), and 88.4% (347/388) had normal or unimportant findings (E1 or E2). E-scores were not significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC when adjusted for age, gender, and prior imaging (p = 0.44). 4.6% (12/262) of patients with E3/E4 findings in the screening cohort demonstrated clinically significant outcomes, compared with 4.0% (5/126) in the diagnostic cohort, including a total of three extracolonic malignancies (0.8%) and three abdominal aortic aneurysms (0.8%). 4.6% (18/388) underwent follow-up imaging studies to confirm a benign outcome after detection of a category E3/E4 finding. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of extracolonic findings and clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between screening and diagnostic CTC populations.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Nonlocalized Abdominal Pain.

The range of pathology in adults that can produce abdominal pain is broad and necessitates an imaging approach to evaluate many different organ systems. Although localizing pain prompts directed imaging/management, clinical presentations may vary and result in nonlocalized symptoms. This review focuses on imaging the adult population with nonlocalized abdominal pain, including patients with fever, recent abdominal surgery, or neutropenia. Imaging of the entire abdomen and pelvis to evaluate for infectious or inflammatory processes of the abdominal viscera and solid organs, abdominal and pelvic neoplasms, and screen for ischemic or vascular etiologies is essential for prompt diagnosis and treatment. Often the first-line modality, CT quickly evaluates the abdomen/pelvis, providing for accurate diagnoses and management of patients with abdominal pain. Ultrasound and tailored MRI protocols may be useful as first-line imaging studies, especially in pregnant patients. In the postoperative abdomen, fluoroscopy may help detect anastomotic leaks/abscesses. While often performed, abdominal radiographs may not alter management. 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.