Medical industry at tumor board: Three-years analysis of the open payments database and comparison of oncologic specialties.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze and contrast medical industry payments across U.S. oncologic providers, including hematology-oncology (HO), surgical oncology (SO), interventional radiology (IR), and radiation oncology (RO). METHODS: Open-payment-data for each provider including provider specialty, state of practice, industry payor, reason for payment, and amount was compiled for each transaction between 2013 and 2015. Total, mean, and median payment amounts per-provider were calculated for each specialty. Tukey's-method was used to identify and remove statistical outliers and Kruskal-Wallis-test with Bonferonni-post-hoc-analysis was used to evaluate for differences in total payments received per-provider across specialties. The percentage of providers accepting payments within each specialty were compared by Marascuilo's multiple-proportion-comparison. RESULTS: Total aggregate payment amount (and number of transactions) for HO, SO, IR, and RO was $164 743 746 (778 007), $7 925 467 (15 031), $49 817 380 (44 939), and $13 643 739 (49 778), respectively. Corrected-median (and corrected-mean) payments-per-specialty were $676 ($1796), $330 ($1209), $487 ($1301), and $242 ($766). A significantly higher proportion of HO providers accepted payments than both RO (97% vs 80%, P < 0.0001) and IR (97% vs 78%, P < 0.0001). The mean total payment received per-provider differed significantly across specialties (P = 0.0001). HO providers, on average, received significantly more payment-per-provider during the study period (P < 0.001) compared to all others while RO and IR received significantly less (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among industry payments made to oncologic providers, HO received the highest median and corrected-mean amounts along with the highest proportion of providers receiving open payments.

IR and the Sunshine Act: Two-Year Analysis of the Open Payments Database and Comparison with Related Specialties.

PURPOSE: To characterize medical industry-based payments made to US-based interventional radiology (IR) physicians, identify trends in compensation, and compare their payment profile with those of other related specialties, including vascular surgery (VS) and interventional cardiology (IC). Payments made to orthopedic surgery (OS) physicians are reported as a historical control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For each group, the total payment number, amount, and mean and median numbers and amounts were calculated. The data were then reanalyzed after correcting for statistical outliers. For IR, VS, and IC, leading industry sponsors, payment amount, and differences in payments from 2013 to 2014 were highlighted. Payments to IR were grouped by category and geographic location. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of $26,857,622 went to 1,831 IR physicians, representing 70.9% of active IR physicians, and the corrected mean payment was $597 ± 832.2 (standard deviation). The respective values were $18,861,041, 3,383, 80.6%, and $851.59 for VS; $32,008,213, 7,939, 78.6%, and $417.16 for IC; and $357,528,020, 21,829, 77.8%, and $598.48 for OS. OS had the largest number of payments (295,465 vs 24,246 for IR, 84,635 for VS, and 160,443 for IC) and greatest total payment amount. VS had a significantly higher corrected median payment amount ($463; P < .0001) than IR ($214) and IC ($99). Covidien and Sirtex Medical were the leading industry sponsors to IR, and 64.6% of IR payments were compensation for services other than consulting. There was no significant difference in median payment received per geographic region (P = .32). CONCLUSIONS: OS received the largest number and total payment amount, and VS received a significantly greater corrected median payment amount, versus IR and IC. As the Open Payments program continues to be implemented, it remains to be seen how this information will affect relationships among physicians, patients, and industry.

Utilization of the track embolization technique to improve the safety of percutaneous lung biopsy and/or fiducial marker placement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to describe and present outcomes of the track embolization technique with absorbable hemostat gelatin powder during percutaneous computed tomography (CT)-guided lung biopsy and/or fiducial marker placement versus the standard of care (no track embolization) in an attempt to decrease rates of pneumothorax (PTX), chest tube placement, hemorrhage and/or complications, and average cost per patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An institutional review board-approved, case-control, retrospective study was performed in which 125 consecutive patients who underwent track embolization were compared with 124 consecutive controls at one institution. For subjects in whom the track embolization technique was utilized, it was performed passively through a coaxial needle as it was removed. All procedures were performed by one of three attending interventional radiologists. For each group, medical records and procedure images were reviewed for PTX occurring postprocedure, PTX requiring chest tube placement, and occurrence of minor or major complication and/or hemorrhage. Comparison was made with published complication rates, and a cost-per-patient analysis was performed. Statistical analysis was performed utilizing Fisher's Exact Test. RESULTS: In track embolization cases versus controls, there were statistically significant reduction in PTX (8.8% vs. 21%; P=.007) and reduction in PTX requiring chest tube placement (4% vs. 8.1%; P=.195). This compares favorably to previously published rates of PTX and chest tube placement of 8%-64% and 1.6%-17%, respectively. None of the pneumothoraces occurring at time of needle placement increased in size with use of the track embolization technique. There were no major complications (including neurological sequela) in the track embolization group. In track embolization cases versus controls, there was a statistically significant reduction in both the rate of major hemorrhage (0% vs. 4%; P=.029) and average cost per patient ($262.40 vs. $352.07; P=.044). CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy and/or fiducial marker placement were safer utilizing the track embolization technique during trocar removal. In addition, this technique was cost effective in the study population.

Intraosseous Vascular Access in Radiology: Review of Clinical Status.

OBJECTIVE: Paramedics and hospital-based providers occasionally need to place intraosseous devices to obtain vascular access in critically ill patients. Diagnostic radiologists must be prepared for the emergent administration of iodinated contrast media via the intraosseous route, and interventional radiologists should be familiar with the potential clinical uses of such access. CONCLUSION: We present a protocol for the administration of iodinated contrast media through the intraosseous route. We also highlight the clinical and radiologic aspects of intraosseous access.

Nonamyloid tumoral light-chain-deposition disease (aggregoma) of the paraspinal region.

Aggregomas are rare localized masses of monoclonal nonamyloid immunoglobulin light-chain deposits. To date, there have been only a few reports of isolated aggregomas, with the majority detailing renal, lymph node and brain deposition. We present a rare case of paraspinal aggregoma in a 67-year-old female who presented with a complaint of cough and chest pain. Imaging demonstrated a left-sided paravertebral mass extending from T7-T10. Pathological analysis showed lamellar deposition of extracellular eosinophilic material with an associated lymphoplasmacytic nonamyloid infiltrate. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a paraspinal aggregoma. While exceedingly rare, this tumor can be included in the radiologic differential diagnosis of paravertebral soft tissue tumors in adults. The observation of our case adds to the limited understanding of the etiology, pathogenesis, natural history, and treatment of nonamyloid light-chain depositions.

Bovine arch and carotid artery atherosclerosis: are they related?

OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of the "bovine" arch in the population is known (8-25%). However, its prevalence in patients with significant carotid atherosclerosis has never been investigated. Altered flow patterns or turbulence that may occur in these patients may play a causative role in the development of atherosclerotic lesions. The primary purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the prevalence of aortic arch variants in patients with and without significant carotid artery atherosclerosis, as we hypothesize that carotid atherosclerosis may be more prevalent in patients with a bovine arch due to hemodynamic alterations. A secondary objective was to review radiologist reporting of arch anatomy. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, case-control study in which 79 patients with hemodynamically significant carotid artery atherosclerosis who underwent computed tomography angiography, magnetic resonance angiography, or unenhanced computed tomography (CT) imaging including the aortic arch were identified. These patients were then compared with 95 randomly selected controls without carotid atherosclerosis that underwent similar imaging during the same time period. Images were independently reviewed by two blinded radiologists, who assessed arch anatomy as normal, bovine, or other variant. The original radiology reports were reviewed for reporting of arch anatomy. RESULTS: In controls, 70% had normal arch anatomy, and 24% had a bovine arch. Among patients with significant carotid disease, these numbers were 70% and 20%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between incidence of arch variants in subjects with and without carotid artery atherosclerosis (P=.97). There was good interreader agreement. Among patients with aortic arch anomalies, 20% of the original radiology reports did not mention arch anatomy. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, percentage of bovine arch anomalies in patients with significant carotid atherosclerosis is not significantly different from those without disease. Clinicians should be aware of the high prevalence of arch anomalies, which can impact endovascular approach and management, and radiologists should be aware of the clinical importance of reporting such variants.

A cardiovascular cause of hematemesis.

Cor triatriatum is a rare congenital heart defect in which a fibromuscular membrane forms an anomalous septum within the left atrium, dividing it into a posterosuperior higher pressure chamber and an anteroinferior anatomically true left atrium. Typically, in cor triatriatum, all four pulmonary veins enter into this accessory chamber, we present an unusual variant of cor triatriatum, in which only the right sided pulmonary veins were involved.

Radiology-pathology conference: primary peritoneal mesothelioma.

Primary peritoneal mesothelioma is a rare neoplasm which carries a dismal prognosis. These highly aggressive tumors arise from mesothelial cells lining the peritoneum and are rapidly fatal. The neoplasm is typically associated with crocidolite asbestos exposure. We present the case of a 75-year-old man with primary peritoneal mesothelioma, with invasion into the right hepatic lobe.

A mysterious cause of a surgical abdomen.

BACKGROUND: Epiploic appendagitis is a rare cause of acute-onset abdominal pain. The severity of pain at presentation and the infrequency with which it is encountered make it a diagnostic challenge. OBJECTIVES: To present a case report exemplifying a diagnostic challenge posed by acute-onset abdominal pain that eventually led to the diagnosis of epiploic appendagitis. CASE REPORT: A 50-year-old woman presented to the Emergency Department complaining of excruciating, sudden-onset lower abdominal pain. All routine laboratory investigations were within normal limits, as were an acute abdominal X-ray series. Computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis with contrast showed a focal fatty infiltration in the left lower quadrant with fat-stranding towards the colon, representing the classical radiological presentation of epiploic appendagitis. The patient was admitted and successfully managed conservatively with intravenous fluids and ibuprofen. The patient made a full recovery and was discharged 3 days after admission. CONCLUSIONS: Due to its benign, self-limited course, it is important to recognize this disease process to avoid unnecessary surgical and medical interventions. Epiploic appendagitis should be suspected in patients presenting with acute onset abdominal pain localized to the left lower quadrant or right lower quadrant with no associated systemic manifestations. Improvements in imaging technology have enabled confirmation of the diagnosis with non-invasive methods.

Indications for inferior vena cava filter placement: do physicians comply with guidelines?

PURPOSE: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement has increased significantly over the past few decades, but indications for filter placement vary widely depending on which professional society recommendations are followed, and it is uncertain how compliant physicians are in adhering to guidelines. This study assessed documented indications for IVC filter placement and evaluated compliance with standards set by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center, retrospective medical record review in a metropolitan, 652-bed, acute care, teaching hospital. Inpatient filter placement over a 26-month period was reviewed. The study measured compliance with established guidelines, relationship of medical specialty to filter placement, and evaluation of self-referral patterns among physicians. RESULTS: Compliance with established ACCP guidelines was poor regardless of whether the IVC filter insertion was performed by interventional radiology (IR; 43.5%), vascular surgery (VS; 39.9%), or interventional cardiology (IC; 33.3%) staff. Compliance with the less restrictive SIR guidelines was better (77.5%, 77.1%, and 80% for IR, VS, and IC, respectively). There was a greater degree of guideline compliance when filter placement was recommended by internal medicine (IM)-trained physicians than by non-IM-trained physicians: 46.3% of IR-placed filters requested by IM physicians met ACCP criteria whereas only 24.0% of filters recommended by non-IM specialties were compliant with criteria (P = .03). In the VS group, these compliance rates were 45.8% and 31.5%, respectively (P = .03). Among IR-placed filters, 84.0% of IM-recommended filter placements were compliant with SIR guidelines, versus only 48.0% of non-IM-recommended placements (P ≤ .001). In the VS group, these compliance rates were 87.8% and 69.6%, respectively (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: There is poor physician compliance with guidelines for IVC filter placement. Most filter indications meeting SIR guidelines are for patients classified as "falls risks," failures of anticoagulation, patients with limited cardiopulmonary reserve and patients non compliant with anticoagulation medications. This single-center study suggests a need for harmonization of current guidelines espoused by professional societies.