ERS/ESTS/ESTRO/ESR/ESTI/EFOMP statement on management of incidental findings from low dose CT screening for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography has a strong evidence base, is being introduced in several European countries and is recommended as a new targeted cancer screening programme. The imperative now is to ensure that implementation follows an evidence-based process that will ensure clinical and cost effectiveness. This European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force was formed to provide an expert consensus for the management of incidental findings which can be adapted and followed during implementation. METHODS: A multi-European society collaborative group was convened. 23 topics were identified, primarily from an ERS statement on lung cancer screening, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted according to ERS standards. Initial review of abstracts was completed and full text was provided to members of the group for each topic. Sections were edited and the final document approved by all members and the ERS Science Council. RESULTS: Nine topics considered most important and frequent were reviewed as standalone topics (interstitial lung abnormalities, emphysema, bronchiectasis, consolidation, coronary calcification, aortic valve disease, mediastinal mass, mediastinal lymph nodes and thyroid abnormalities). Other topics considered of lower importance or infrequent were grouped into generic categories, suitable for general statements. CONCLUSIONS: This European collaborative group has produced an incidental findings statement that can be followed during lung cancer screening. It will ensure that an evidence-based approach is used for reporting and managing incidental findings, which will mean that harms are minimised and any programme is as cost-effective as possible.

ERS/ESTS/ESTRO/ESR/ESTI/EFOMP statement on management of incidental findings from low dose CT screening for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography has a strong evidence base, is being introduced in several European countries and is recommended as a new targeted cancer screening programme. The imperative now is to ensure that implementation follows an evidence-based process that will ensure clinical and cost effectiveness. This European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force was formed to provide an expert consensus for the management of incidental findings which can be adapted and followed during implementation. METHODS: A multi-European society collaborative group was convened. 23 topics were identified, primarily from an ERS statement on lung cancer screening, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted according to ERS standards. Initial review of abstracts was completed and full text was provided to members of the group for each topic. Sections were edited and the final document approved by all members and the ERS Science Council. RESULTS: Nine topics considered most important and frequent were reviewed as standalone topics (interstitial lung abnormalities, emphysema, bronchiectasis, consolidation, coronary calcification, aortic valve disease, mediastinal mass, mediastinal lymph nodes and thyroid abnormalities). Other topics considered of lower importance or infrequent were grouped into generic categories, suitable for general statements. CONCLUSIONS: This European collaborative group has produced an incidental findings statement that can be followed during lung cancer screening. It will ensure that an evidence-based approach is used for reporting and managing incidental findings, which will mean that harms are minimised and any programme is as cost-effective as possible.

Non-invasive zero-heat-flux technology compared with traditional core temperature measurements in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Core temperatures (Tcore) are often invasive, and can be underutilized. Peripheral temperatures are easier to obtain, but are often less accurate. A zero-heat-flux thermometer (ZHF) is a non-invasive method to obtain core temperatures (TZHF), and has been accurate when compared to Tcore in the operating room. We aimed to determine whether TZHF accurately and reliably measures Tcore in emergency department (ED) patients when compared to rectal, bladder or esophageal temperatures. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational quality improvement project, with concurrent TZHF and Tcore measurements. The primary outcome was whether one device detected a fever (≥38.1 °C) when the other device did not. Unadjusted linear regression was used to determine the relationship between temperature differences between devices. RESULTS: 268 patients were included. Mean temperatures were 36.6 °C for Tcore and 36.3 °C for TZHF. 16 of 52 patients with fever identified by Tcore were not detected by TZHF, 13 with an infectious etiology. The mean temperature difference between Tcore and TZHF increased as the patient's temperature increased; the difference was 0.2 °C in afebrile patients, but 0.7 °C in febrile patients. CONCLUSION: While we found overall concordance between Tcore and TZHF, the ZHF did not detect fever in 25% of patients presenting with fever of infectious origin. Measurements between Tcore and TZHF varied more as temperatures increased, with TZHF consistently reporting lower values. Although more study is needed, these findings call into question the use of TZHF in the ED where detection of fever frequently guides patient evaluation and management.