ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Lower Extremity Chronic Venous Disease.

Lower extremity venous insufficiency is a chronic medical condition resulting from primary valvular incompetence or, less commonly, prior deep venous thrombosis or extrinsic venous obstruction. Lower extremity chronic venous disease has a high prevalence with a related socioeconomic burden. In the United States, over 11 million males and 22 million females 40 to 80 years of age have varicose veins, with over 2 million adults having advanced chronic venous disease. The high cost to the health care system is related to the recurrent nature of venous ulcerative disease, with total treatment costs estimated >$2.5 billion per year in the United States, with at least 20,556 individuals with newly diagnosed venous ulcers yearly. Various diagnostic and treatment strategies are in place for lower extremity chronic venous disease and are discussed 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® Central Venous Access Device and Site Selection.

The use of central venous access devices is ubiquitous in both inpatient and outpatient settings, whether for critical care, oncology, hemodialysis, parenteral nutrition, or diagnostic purposes. Radiology has a well-established role in the placement of these devices due to demonstrated benefits of radiologic placement in multiple clinical settings. A wide variety of devices are available for central venous access and optimal device selection is a common clinical challenge. Central venous access devices may be nontunneled, tunneled, or implantable. They may be centrally or peripherally inserted by way of veins in the neck, extremities, or elsewhere. Each device and access site presents specific risks that should be considered in each clinical scenario to minimize the risk of harm. The risk of infection and mechanical injury should be minimized in all patients. In hemodialysis patients, preservation of future access is an additional important consideration. 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® Radiologic Management of Mesenteric Ischemia: 2022 Update.

Mesenteric ischemia is a serious medical condition characterized by insufficient vascular supply to the small bowel. In the acute setting, endovascular interventions, including embolectomy, transcatheter thrombolysis, and angioplasty with or without stent placement, are recommended as initial therapeutic options. For nonocclusive mesenteric ischemia, transarterial infusion of vasodilators, such as papaverine or prostaglandin E1, is the recommended initial treatment. In the chronic setting, endovascular means of revascularization, including angioplasty and stent placement, are generally recommend, with surgical options, such as bypass or endarterectomy, considered alternative options. Although the diagnosis of median arcuate ligament syndrome remains controversial, diagnostic angiography can be helpful in rendering a diagnosis, with the preferred treatment option being a surgical release. Systemic anticoagulation is recommended as initial therapy for venous mesenteric ischemia with acceptable rates of recanalization. If anticoagulation fails, transcatheter thrombolytic infusion can be considered with possible adjunctive placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt to augment antegrade flow. 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 where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Bleeding: 2021 Update.

Diverticulosis remains the commonest cause for acute lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding (GIB). Conservative management is initially sufficient for most patients, followed by elective diagnostic tests. However, if acute lower GIB persists, it can be investigated with colonoscopy, CT angiography (CTA), or red blood cell (RBC) scan. Colonoscopy can identify the site and cause of bleeding and provide effective treatment. CTA is a noninvasive diagnostic tool that is better tolerated by patients, can identify actively bleeding site or a potential bleeding lesion in vast majority of patients. RBC scan can identify intermittent bleeding, and with single-photon emission computed tomography, can more accurately localize it to a small segment of bowel. If patients are hemodynamically unstable, CTA and transcatheter arteriography/embolization can be performed. Colonoscopy can also be considered in these patients if rapid bowel preparation is feasible. Transcatheter arteriography has a low rate of major complications; however, targeted transcatheter embolization is only feasible if extravasation is seen, which is more likely in hemodynamically unstable patients. If bleeding site has been previously localized but the intervention by colonoscopy and transcatheter embolization have failed to achieve hemostasis, surgery may be required. Among patients with obscure (nonlocalized) recurrent bleeding, capsule endoscopy and CT enterography can be considered to identify culprit mucosal lesion(s). 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.

Safety and efficacy of combined micropuncture and shallow angle femoral artery access for neurovascular angiography.

INTRODUCTION: The AXERA 2 low-angle vascular access device utilizes a dual arteriotomy mechanism in which the standard access tract is compressed by a vascular sheath inserted over the second, low-angle tract. It is unknown whether this device could be effectively used with 21-gauge micropuncture access, as the micropuncture introducer makes a larger arteriotomy than the 19-gauge needle provided with the AXERA 2 system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 189 patients who underwent common femoral artery access for diagnostic cerebrovascular angiography using either combined micropuncture and AXERA 2 access or standard access with manual pressure hemostasis. Demographic and procedural data were reviewed along with complications related to vascular access and times to bed elevation, ambulation and discharge. RESULTS: Combined micropuncture and AXERA 2 access was performed on 110 patients and 79 patients had standard access. The AXERA device was successfully used in 91.8% of the cases. Demographic data, anticoagulant use and sheath sizes were similar between both subsets. Use of the AXERA 2 was associated with two bleeding complications (1.8%) compared with 10 (12.7%) with manual pressure hemostasis alone. Institution-specific protocol allowed shorter mean manual compression time, as well as shorter times to ambulation and discharge with the AXERA 2. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the AXERA 2 device with micropuncture access did not infer increased bleeding risk than standard arterial access in this patient series. The considerable incidence of device use failures suggests a learning curve associated with its use.