Modeling diffusion-weighted imaging lesion expansion between 2 and 24 h after endovascular thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke.

PURPOSE: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lesion expansion after endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is not well characterized. We used serial diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to measure lesion expansion between 2 and 24 h after EVT. METHODS: In this single-center observational analysis of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion, DWI was performed post-EVT (< 2 h after closure) and 24-h later. DWI lesion expansion was evaluated using multivariate generalized linear mixed modeling with various clinical moderators. RESULTS: We included 151 patients, of which 133 (88%) had DWI lesion expansion, defined as a positive change in lesion volume between 2 and 24 h. In an unadjusted analysis, median baseline DWI lesion volume immediately post-EVT was 15.0 mL (IQR: 6.6-36.8) and median DWI lesion volume 24 h post-EVT was 20.8 mL (IQR: 9.4-66.6), representing a median change of 6.1 mL (IQR: 1.5-17.7), or a 39% increase. There were no significant associations among univariable models of lesion expansion. Adjusted models of DWI lesion expansion demonstrated that relative lesion expansion (defined as final/initial DWI lesion volume) was consistent across eTICI scores (0-2a, 0.52%; 2b, 0.49%; 2c-3, 0.42%, p = 0.69). For every 1 mL increase in lesion volume, there was 2% odds of an increase in 90-day mRS (OR: 1.021, 95%CI [1.009, 1.034], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We observed substantial lesion expansion post-EVT whereby relative lesion expansion was consistent across eTICI categories, and greater absolute lesion expansion was associated with worse clinical outcome. Our findings suggest that alternate endpoints for cerebroprotectant trials may be feasible.

Value of acute neurovascular imaging in patients with suspected transient ischemic attack.

PURPOSE: Acute neurovascular imaging including MRA and/or CTA are routinely performed in the emergency departments (ED) for patients who present with suspected transient ischemic attacks (TIA). Given the current emphasis on mitigating the rising cost of health care nationally, and promoting high value practice, we sought to determine 1) the value of acute neurovascular imaging in patients presenting to the ED with TIA-like symptoms, and 2) whether these neurovascular studies led to a difference in management strategies. METHOD: We retrospectively reviewed 398 ED patients who presented with transient neurological deficits and underwent neurovascular imaging from 2015 to 2018. We reviewed diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and neurovascular results by patient demographics, baseline risk factors, final diagnosis, treatment/management dispositions and three-month follow-up. RESULTS: 28.1% (112/398) of patients were diagnosed with true TIA, whereas 71.9% patients were deemed to have a non-vascular etiology. Total rates of positive MRA/CTA for severe intracranial (>50%) and cervical vessel (>70%) stenosis were 10.5% and 1.7%. Patients with positive DWI scans had significantly higher rates of severe vascular stenosis (24.4% versus 7.8% intracranially and 2.4% versus 0.9% in the neck) compared to those with negative DWI scans. All patients were treated with multi-pronged medical therapies with no immediate surgical intervention. A follow-up stroke was equally likely in TIA patients with or without severe vascular stenosis. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting with TIA-like symptoms and DWI negative scans, the overall rate of positive neurovascular studies is very low. Triaging with DWI can reduce the frequency of unnecessary neurovascular imaging.

Parotid Warthin's tumor: novel MR imaging score as diagnostic indicator.

OBJECTIVES: Despite known characteristic radiologic and clinical features, differentiation between Warthin's tumor (WT) and other parotid tumors remains challenging. The purpose of this study was to more precisely assess the MR imaging features of WT and to develop a scoring system combining the most specific characteristics. METHODS: A total of 208 patients with parotid gland tumors and presurgical MRI were included. Tumors were divided into 5 histological subtypes, and different MRI features were compared between groups. An MRI scoring test was developed including MR parameters that contributed significantly in distinguishing WT from other tumors. RESULTS: The best MRI features for differentiating between WTs from other tumors included bilaterality (P = 0.002), multifocality (P < 0.001), ADC values <905.1 (P < 0.001), and high signal intensity on T1-W images (P < 0.001). Six or more points on the 14-point scoring MRI scale was associated with an area under the curve of 0.99 (Accuracy of 98%), while a cut-off value of 7 indicated 100% specificity and 100% positive predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: Ill-defined margins, low T1-W signal, and location in the upper 2/3 of the parotid gland excluded WTs in 100% of cases. The proposed scoring method allows WTs to be distinguished from other tumors with high accuracy.

Benefits of digital breast tomosynthesis: A lesion-level analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcome metrics of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) breast cancer screening with full-field digital mammogram (FFDM); specifically, to compare recall rates by the type of recalled finding, and to assess if screening with DBT versus FFDM changes biopsy recommendations and if the likelihood of malignancy varied by lesion type, if detected on DBT or FFDM screening mammogram. METHODS: The outcomes of 22,055 FFDM and DBT screening mammograms were retrospectively reviewed. The exams were performed at an academic institution between August 2015 and September 2016. Performance of screening with FFDM versus DBT was compared in terms of recall rate and percentage of recalled lesions resulting in a cancer diagnosis, with subset analyses performed for specific mammographic findings. RESULTS: The recall rate was 10.6% for FFDM and 8.0% for DBT (p < 0.001). Architectural distortion was more likely to be recalled on DBT screening than FFDM (p = 0.002), and was associated with an increased likelihood of malignancy (p = 0.008). Asymmetries were less likely to be recalled on DBT than FFDM (p < 0.001) screening mammogram, but more likely to be recommended for biopsy when detected on DBT. Calcifications more frequently required short-term follow-up or biopsy on both DBT and FFDM. CONCLUSIONS: DBT screening confers an advantage in detection of architectural distortion representing malignancy. Recall rate of asymmetries are reduced with screening DBT, probably due to reduction of tissue superimposition. Calcifications pose a particularly difficult diagnostic challenge for breast imagers, regardless of screening mammogram type.

Prospective Clinical Trials: 10-year Trends in Radiology.

Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Imaging features of vertebral artery fenestration.

PURPOSE: Vertebral artery fenestration (VAF) is a rare congenital vascular anomaly which has been associated with intracranial aneurysm. VAF can share some similar imaging features with vertebral artery dissection (VAD), which may confound diagnosis of the latter on CT and MR angiography. The purpose of this investigation is to assess the prevalence of VAF, evaluate its association with other vascular anomalies, and identify imaging features to help in distinguishing VAF and VAD. METHODS: Using keyword search on CTA and MRA head and neck imaging reports from 2010 to 2017, cases of VAF and VAD were retrospectively identified and imaging was reviewed. Imaging features including laterality; vertebral segment; length of affected segment; presence, number, and caliber of lumen(s); and presence of other vascular abnormalities were recorded for all cases and subsequently compared using Pearson's chi-squared test to assess for significant differences between the groups. Patient age, gender, and clinical presentations were also recorded. RESULTS: Of 64,888 CT and MR angiographic examinations performed, VAF was identified in 67 (0.1%) and VAD in 54 (0.1%) patients. Compared with VADs, VAFs were shorter in length (p < 0.001), wider in luminal diameter (p < 0.001), more likely to occur at the V4 segment (p < 0.01), more likely to have two distinct lumens rather than one (p < 0.01), and less likely to present post-trauma (p < 0.01). Coexisting intracranial aneurysms were identified in 9% of patients with VAF. CONCLUSION: VAFs, although rare, can be readily distinguished from VADs on angiographic imaging. Diagnosis of VAF should prompt review for intracranial aneurysm.

Comparing the short-term cost-effectiveness of epidural steroid injections and medical management alone for discogenic lumbar radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are a commonly used treatment strategy for low back pain and lumbar radiculopathy. However, their cost-effectiveness and ability to mediate long-term quality of life (QOL) improvements is debated. We sought to analyze the cost-effectiveness of lumbar epidural steroid injections (ESIs) compared to medical management alone for patients with lumbar radiculopathy and low back pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: QOL outcomes were prospectively collected at 3- and 6-months following initial consultation. Metrics included the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire, the Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Cost estimations were based on Medicare national payment amounts, median income, and missed workdays. A cost-utility analysis was performed based upon cost estimations and a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000/Quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: One hundred forty-one patients met our inclusion/exclusion criteria; 89 received ESI and 52 were treated with medical management alone. Both cohorts showed improved EQ-5D scores at 3 months but were similar to one another: ESI (ΔEQ-5D = 0.06; p = 0.03) and medical-alone (ΔEQ-5D = 0.07; p = 0.03). No significant difference was seen between groups for total costs ($2,190 vs. $1,772; p = 0.18) or cost-utility ratios ($38,710/QALY vs. $27,313/QALY; p = 0.73). At both the 3-month and 6-month endpoints, absolute differences in cost-utility was driven by overall costs as opposed to QALY gains. Medical management alone was more cost effective at both points owing to lower expenditures, however these differences were not significant. No benefits were seen in either group on the EQ-5D or any of the patient reported outcomes at the 6-month time point. CONCLUSION: ESIs were not cost-effective at either the 3-month or 6-month follow-up period. At 3 months, ESIs provide similar improvements in QOL outcomes relative to medical management and at similar costs. At 6 months, neither ESIs nor conservative management provide significant improvements in QOL outcomes.

Musculoskeletal Radiology Reports: Overlooked or Valuable?

The electronic medical record (EMR) can reveal preferences of clinicians regarding imaging services. We sought to evaluate viewing habits for reports and images of musculoskeletal (MSK) studies by ordering clinicians. We hypothesized that MSK reports are important to clinical management, especially for advanced imaging modalities. We tracked the image and report access of all MSK studies ordered in September 2016 over 8 months using logs of the EMR (Epic Systems, Verona, WI), and by an independent analysis of the institutional PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication Systems) (Carestream Health, Rochester, NY). The time stamps were extracted for when images and reports were viewed. We categorized MSK studies by modality and provider department. We also compared the rates of viewing reports and images among different modalities and departments using the chi-square test. Of the 8143 viewed MSK studies, 7842 (96.3%) reports (with/without images) and 3916 (48.1%) imaging data (with/without reports) were viewed. Viewing reports alone occurred in 4227 (51.9%) studies. CT and MRI reports alone views occurred more often in comparison to radiographs ([482/706; 68.3%] for CT and [981/1713; 57.3%] for MRI vs. [2764/5724; 48.3%] for radiography, p < 0.001). Orthopedists ordered the highest number of MSK studies and viewed reports 99.2% (3216/3242) of the time, including a 54.6% (1770/3242) rate of viewing reports alone and a 44.6% (1446/3242) rate of viewing both reports and images. They viewed images without reports in 0.8% (27/3242) of cases. MSK reports were viewed significantly more frequently than the images across all modalities and all relevant specialties.

Quality of life changes after lumbar decompression in patients with tandem spinal stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Tandem spinal stenosis (TSS) is a degenerative spinal condition characterized by spinal canal narrowing at 2 or more distinct spinal levels. It is an aging-related condition that is likely to increase as the population ages, but which remains poorly described in the literature. Here we sought to determine the impact of primary lumbar decompression on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes in patients with symptomatic TSS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 803 patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of TSS treated between 2008 and 2014 with a minimum 2-year follow-up. The records of patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of concurrent cervical and lumbar stenosis were reviewed. Prospectively gathered QOL data, including the Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), EuroQOL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back pain, were assessed at the 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-ups. RESULTS: Of 803 identified patients (mean age 66.2 years; 46.9% male), 19.6% underwent lumbar decompression only, 14.1% underwent cervical + lumbar decompression, and 66.4% underwent conservative management only. Baseline VAS scores were similar across all groups, but patients undergoing conservative management had better baseline QOL scores on all other measures. Both surgical cohorts experienced significant improvements in the VAS, PDQ, and EQ-5D at all time points; patients in the cervical + lumbar cohort also had significant improvement in the PHQ-9. Conservatively managed patients showed no significant improvement in QOL scores at any follow-up interval. CONCLUSION: Lumbar decompression with or without cervical decompression improves low back pain and QOL outcomes in patients with TSS. The decision to prioritize lumbar decompression is therefore unlikely to adversely affect long-term quality-of-life improvements.

Cost and quality of life outcome analysis of postoperative infections after posterior lumbar decompression and fusion.

Surgical site infections (SSI) following spine procedures are serious and costly complications that may reduce patient quality of life (QOL). Deep SSIs may also extend hospitalizations and require surgical debridement or antibiotic therapy, increasing costs to both patients and the healthcare system. Here we sought to evaluate the effect of deep SSI on care cost and QOL outcomes in patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression and fusion. To do so we performed a retrospective study of patients undergoing lumbar decompression and fusion between 2008 and 2012. Patients experiencing postoperative deep SSI were matched to controls not experiencing a deep SSI. Included patients had prospectively-gathered QOL outcome measures collected preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. Health resource utilization was recorded from patient electronic medical records over the 6-month follow-up. Direct costs were estimated using Medicare national payment amounts. Indirect costs were based on missed work days and patient income. We found both cohorts experienced significant improvements in QOL scores following surgery, and there were no significant differences between the cohorts. The average total cost was significantly higher in the infected cohort compared to controls ($37,009 vs. $16,227; p < 0.0001). Compared to controls, patients experiencing deep SSI had greater costs in each of the following categories: hospitalizations (p < 0.01), office visits (p = 0.03), imaging (p < 0.01), and medications (p < 0.01). Among those experiencing deep SSI, there are significant increases in costs, with minimal long-term impact on QOL outcomes as compared with controls at the six-month follow-up.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections: A 3-Month Pilot Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: There are conflicting reports on the short- and long-term quality of life (QOL) outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cervical epidural steroid injections (ESIs). The present study analyzes the cost-effectiveness analysis of ESIs versus conservative management for patients with radiculopathy or neck pain in the short term. METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent cervical ESI and 29 patients who received physical therapy and pain medication alone for cervical radiculopathy and neck pain of <6 months duration were included. Three-month postoperative health outcomes were assessed based on EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D; measured in quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]). Medical costs were estimated using Medicare national payment amounts. Cost/utility ratios and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated to assess for cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The ESI cohort experienced significant (P < .01) improvement in the EQ-5D score while the control cohort did not (0.13 vs 0.02 QALYs, respectively; P = .01). There were no significant differences in costs between the cohorts. The cost-utility ratio for the ESI cohort was significantly lower ($21 884/QALY gained) than that for the control cohort ($176 412/QALY gained) (P < .01). The ICER for an ESI versus conservative management was negative, indicating that ESIs provide greater improvement in QOL at a lower cost. CONCLUSIONS: ESIs provide significant improvement in QOL within 3 months for patients with cervical radiculopathy and neck pain. ESIs are more cost-effective compared than conservative management alone in the shor -term. The durability of these results must be analyzed with longer term cost-utility analysis studies.

Factors Impacting False Positive Recall in Screening Mammography.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to identify factors impacting false positive recalls in screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our screening mammography database from August 31, 2015 to September 30, 2016, including full field digital mammograms (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) mammograms. False positive (FP) exams were defined as Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 1 or 2 assessments at diagnostic imaging with 1 year cancer-free follow-up, Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 assessment at diagnostic imaging with 2 years cancer free follow-up, or biopsy with benign pathology. True positives were defined as malignant pathology on biopsy or surgical excision. We evaluated the association of FP recalls with multiple patient-level factors and imaging features. RESULTS: A total of 22,055 screening mammograms were performed, and 1887 patients were recalled (recall rate 8.6%). Recall rate was lower for DBT than full field digital mammograms (8.0% vs 10.6%, p < 0.001). FP results were lower if prior mammograms were available (90.8% vs 95.8%, p = 0.02), and if there was a previous benign breast biopsy (87.6% vs 92.9%, p = 0.01). Mean age for the FP group was lower than the true positive group (56.1 vs 62.9 years, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in FP recalls based on history of high-risk lesions, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, hormone use, breast density, race, or body mass index. CONCLUSION: FP recalls were significantly less likely with DBT, in older women, in patients with prior mammograms available for comparison, and in patients with histories of benign breast biopsy. This study supports the importance of using DBT in the screening setting and obtaining prior mammograms for comparison.

"Worst Headache of Life" in a Migraineur: Marginal Value of Emergency Department CT Scanning.

PURPOSE: The ACR Appropriateness Criteria recommend performing noncontrast head CT (NCCT) for patients with sudden severe headache ("worst headache of life" [WHOL] or "thunderclap headache" [TCH]). The aim of this study was to assess the value of NCCT scanning in patients with known migraine histories and WHOL or TCH. The hypothesis was that there would be little utility in performing emergency department (ED) NCCT scans in migraineurs without other red flags, even if they had WHOL or TCH. METHODS: The ED NCCT scans of all patients reporting WHOL or TCH who had established diagnoses of migraine were retrospectively reviewed over a 5-year period. Patients without known intracranial pathology, cancer, or immunocompromising disease or recent head trauma were included as the main study group. For comparison, patients with any of those factors were included as the comparison group. Scans were graded as (1) normal, (2) minor unimportant findings, (3) findings requiring intervention or follow-up, or (4) critical. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four patients with the chief symptom of WHOL or TCH and a history of migraine who underwent ED NCCT were studied. In the main study group, no patients had grade 4 imaging findings (0%), one had a false-positive grade 3 finding (0.8%), and there were no cases of subarachnoid hemorrhage (0%). In the comparison group, six patients had grade 4 imaging findings (6.5%) and three had grade 3 findings (3.3%). CONCLUSIONS: NCCT in known migraineurs with WHOL or TCH who do not have intracranial pathology, cancer, immunocompromising disease, or recent head trauma yielded no critical findings. Therefore, the value of scanning these patients is questionable.

Spine Surgeon Treatment Variability: The Impact on Costs.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. OBJECTIVES: Given the lack of strong evidence/guidelines on appropriate treatment for lumbar spine disease, substantial variability exists among surgical treatments utilized, which is associated with differences in costs to treat a given pathology. Our goal was to investigate the variability in costs among spine surgeons nationally for the same pathology in similar patients. METHODS: Four hundred forty-five spine surgeons completed a survey of clinical and radiographic case scenarios on patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation, low back pain, and spondylolisthesis. Those surveyed were asked to provide various details including their geographical location, specialty, and fellowship training. Treatment options included no surgery, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterolateral fusion, and transforaminal/posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Costs were estimated via Medicare national payment amounts. RESULTS: For recurrent lumbar disc herniation, no difference in costs existed for patients undergoing their first revision microdiscectomy. However, for patients undergoing another microdiscectomy, surgeons who operated <100 times/year had significantly lower costs than those who operated >200 times/year (P < .001) and those with 5-15 years of experience had significantly higher costs than those with >15 years (P < .001). For the treatment of low back pain, academic surgeons kept costs about 55% lower than private practice surgeons (P < .001). In the treatment of spondylolisthesis, there was significant treatment variability without significant differences in costs. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variability in surgical treatment paradigms exists for different pathologies. Understanding why variability in treatment selection exists in similar clinical contexts across practices is important to ensure the most cost-effective delivery of care among spine surgeons.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Radiology: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have become more prevalent in radiology. However, the lack of standard methodology may lead to conflicting conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of an imaging modality and hinder CEA-based policy recommendations. This study reviews recent CEAs to identify areas of methodological variation, explore their impact on interpretation, and discuss optimal strategies for performing CEAs in radiology. METHODS: We performed a systematic review for cost-utility analyses in radiology from 2013 to 2017. Cost and quality-of-life methods were analyzed and compared using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. RESULTS: Eighty cost-utility studies met our inclusion criteria. A payer perspective was the most common (70%) and hospital perspective the least common (5%). Fourteen studies (17.5%) did not report perspective, and 12 (15%) reported a perspective inconsistent with their performed analysis. Cost inclusion varied greatly between studies; adverse effects of imaging (20.5%) and hospitalization (34.6%) were the least frequently included direct costs. Studies that measured their own utilities most commonly used the EuroQol-5D and Short Form-6D questionnaires; however, most studies (80%) cited utilities from previous literature. Seventy-two studies (90%) used willingness-to-pay thresholds, and 30 used cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (41.7%). CONCLUSION: We observed statistically significant methodological variation indicating the need for a standardized, accurate means of performing and presenting CEAs within radiology. We make several recommendations to address key problems regarding study perspective, cost inclusion, and use of willingness-to-pay thresholds. Further work is required to ensure comparability and transparency between studies such that policymakers are properly informed when utilizing CEA results.

Clinical Access and Utilization of Reports and Images in Neuroradiology.

BACKGROUND: The radiology report serves as the primary means of communication between radiologist and clinician. However, the value clinicians place on imaging and reports is variable, with many images of studies or their reports never being viewed. This has implications on the perceived value of the radiologist in the imaging chain. We hypothesized that neurologists, neurosurgeons, and otolaryngologists would view neuroradiology images most frequently and neuroradiology reports least frequently of all medical specialties. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ordering data were collected on all neuroradiology studies over a 1-month period. Imaging study date and time stamps were obtained for (1) when imaging study orders were placed, (2) when the patient underwent the imaging study, (3) when the imaging studies were viewed, and (4) when the radiology reports were accessed and by whom. Each data point included provider names, locations, departments, and level of training. RESULTS: There were 7,438 imaging neuroradiology studies ordered. Overall, 85.7% (6,372) of reports and 53.2% (3,956) of imaging studies were viewed and 13.1% (977) of studies had neither images nor reports viewed. Inpatient neurosurgeons and neurologists viewed both imaging and reports significantly more than primary care specialties (P < .001). In the outpatient setting, this trend stayed true for neurosurgeons though was not true for neurologists (P < .001). Outpatient study imaging and reports were both viewed the least (48.6%), and inpatient study reports were viewed the most (95.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Viewing of imaging and reports varies with neurosurgeons viewing neuroradiology studies more than all other medical specialties. Overall, the reports were viewed significantly more than the images, suggesting that the radiologist and his or her interpretation are more valuable than the study's images. The radiologists' value, as measured by reports viewed, was maximal with obstetricians and gynecologists and psychiatry clinicians.