Consensus Statements on Deployment-Related Respiratory Disease, Inclusive of Constrictive Bronchiolitis: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of constrictive bronchiolitis (CB) in previously deployed individuals, and evaluation of respiratory symptoms more broadly, presents considerable challenges, including using consistent histopathologic criteria and clinical assessments. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the recommended diagnostic workup and associated terminology of respiratory symptoms in previously deployed individuals? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Nineteen experts participated in a three-round modified Delphi study, ranking their level of agreement for each statement with an a priori definition of consensus. Additionally, rank-order voting on the recommended diagnostic approach and terminology was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-five of 28 statements reached consensus, including the definition of CB as a histologic pattern of lung injury that occurs in some previously deployed individuals while recognizing the importance of considering alternative diagnoses. Consensus statements also identified a diagnostic approach for the previously deployed individual with respiratory symptoms, distinguishing assessments best performed at a local or specialty referral center. Also, deployment-related respiratory disease (DRRD) was proposed as a broad term to subsume a wide range of potential syndromes and conditions identified through noninvasive evaluation or when surgical lung biopsy reveals evidence of multicompartmental lung injury that may include CB. INTERPRETATION: Using a modified Delphi technique, consensus statements provide a clinical approach to possible CB in previously deployed individuals. Use of DRRD provides a broad descriptor encompassing a range of postdeployment respiratory findings. Additional follow-up of individuals with DRRD is needed to assess disease progression and to define other features of its natural history, which could inform physicians better and lead to evolution in this nosology.

E-cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI) in the time of COVID-19: A clinical dilemma.

AIM: To report on the clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings of adolescents who presented during the SARS-CoV-2 surge with symptoms of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), did not test positive for the infection, and were diagnosed with E-cigarette and vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI). METHODS: A retrospective review of 12 cases of EVALI admitted to the Bristol Meyers Squibb Children's Hospital between February 2020 and June 2020 was conducted. RESULTS: The ages of the patients ranged from 14 to 19 years. There were six males and six females. Three patients had a past history of anxiety, depression, or other psychiatric/mental health disorder, 9 had prolonged coagulation profile (prothrombin time, partial thromboplastin time, and/or International Normalized Ratio), and 11 had elevated inflammatory markers. Eight needed respiratory support. All 12 were negative for SARS-CoV-2 PCR. Four were tested for IgG antibodies and were negative. As these cases were admitted to rule out COVID infection, initial treatment included hydroxychloroquine. Steroids were started only after SARS-CoV-2 PCR was shown to be negative. Urine tetrahydrocannabinol was positive in all cases. Chest X-ray and computed tomography findings showed ground glass opacities. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and radiological features are similar in both EVALI and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Inflammatory markers are elevated in both conditions. A detailed social and substance use history in patients presenting with "typical" COVID pneumonia like illness is important. EVALI should be ruled in early to start the appropriate treatment. Given the ongoing pandemic, pediatricians and other health-care providers need to be aware of other conditions that can masquerade as SARS-CoV-2.

Augmenting the National Institutes of Health Chest Radiograph Dataset with Expert Annotations of Possible Pneumonia.

This dataset is intended to be used for machine learning and is composed of annotations with bounding boxes for pulmonary opacity on chest radiographs which may represent pneumonia in the appropriate clinical setting.

Comprehensive genomic profiling aids in treatment of a metastatic endometrial cancer.

FGFR-TACC fusions, including FGFR3-TACC3, have been identified as potential oncogenic drivers and actionable alterations in a number of different cancer types. The clinical relevance of FGFR3-TACC3 fusions in endometrial cancer has not yet been described. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded metastatic endometrial carcinoma from the spleen and peritoneum were sent for comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) using the FoundationOne platform as part of a prospective tumor genomic profiling protocol. We report the identification of an FGFR3-TACC3 fusion in a case of metastatic endometrioid endometrial cancer. Other potentially actionable alterations detected in this specimen included PIK3CA T1025S and an uncharacterized rearrangement involving TSC2 The patient initially received an FGFR inhibitor as an investigational agent and experienced stable disease with complete resolution of a pelvic nodule; however, treatment had to be discontinued because of intolerable side effects. A PET/CT scan nearly 3 mo after discontinuation showed disease progression. She subsequently received the mTOR inhibitor, temsirolimus, later accompanied by letrozole, and achieved stable disease. Clinical benefit was attributed to the mTOR inhibitor as tumor stained negative for estrogen receptor. Temsirolimus was discontinued after >17 mo because of disease progression. FGFR inhibitors may have clinical benefit in the treatment of endometrial carcinoma with FGFR3-TACC3 fusions. Additionally, clinical benefit from an mTOR inhibitor may reflect a response to targeting the alteration in PIK3CA or TSC2 More research is needed to understand the activity of FGFR3-TACC3 fusions on tumors and to discover additional therapeutic options for endometrial carcinoma patients with this gene fusion.

Massive endometrioma presenting with dyspnea and abdominal symptoms.

An abdominal mass may present with a myriad of symptoms resulting from compression of surrounding organs. A major clinical challenge with practical implications is accurate preoperative identification of the origin of the mass. Here, we present the case of a 29-year-old female patient with abdominal distension and shortness of breath for approximately 6 weeks before presentation. A large abdominal mass compressing the surrounding organs was observed on abdominal x-ray and computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis. Preoperative imaging was unable to identify the organ of origin; pathologic and histologic analyses of the tumor ultimately identified a rare, massive intra-abdominal endometrioma, freely floating within the peritoneum and fed by an omental blood supply. This case highlights the importance of considering an atypical presentation of endometriosis in women of reproductive age with abdominal complaints.

Comparison of Mammographic Changes Across Three Different Fractionation Schedules for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: As the use of hypofractionated breast radiation therapy (RT) increases, so will the need for long-term data on post-RT mammographic changes. The purpose of the present study was to longitudinally compare the incidence of common mammographic sequelae seen after breast conserving surgery and RT in patients treated with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI), and conventionally fractionated whole breast irradiation (WBI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients treated with either APBI or HWBI after breast conserving therapy and with ≥3 mammograms of the treated breast were identified. They were matched 1:1 by age ±5 years to patients treated with WBI. The mammograms were evaluated for common post-RT breast findings by a mammographer who was unaware of the treatment. The outcomes were analyzed using a cumulative logistic regression model; P<.05 indicated statistically significance. RESULTS: Of 89 patients treated with RT from 2006 to 2011, 29 had received APBI, 30 had received HWBI, and 30 had received WBI. Their median age was 60 years (range 33-83). A total of 605 mammograms were evaluated, with a median follow-up of 48 months. The treatment technique did not affect the severity of architectural distortion when the groups were evaluated longitudinally. The likelihood of finding skin thickening decreased with increasing follow-up duration (odds ratio 0.6; P<.001) adjusted for fractionation schemes. No differences were seen with respect to changes in skin thickening, fluid collections, or calcifications among the treatment groups, after adjustment for the follow-up time. The clinical characteristics, including age, race, T stage, and chemotherapy use, were not linked to the likelihood of finding several mammographic phenomena over time. CONCLUSIONS: Although specific post-treatment imaging findings evolved over time, RT fractionation did not alter the relative incidence or severity of architectural distortion, skin thickening, fluid collections, or calcifications. These findings will be useful to both radiologists and radiation oncologists when counseling patients regarding follow-up studies after RT.

ACR CT Accreditation Program and the Lung Cancer Screening Program Designation.

The ACR recognizes that low-dose CT for lung cancer screening has the potential to significantly reduce mortality from lung cancer in the appropriate high-risk population. The ACR supports the recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for screening patients. To be effective, lung cancer screening should be performed at sites providing high-quality low-dose CT examinations overseen and interpreted by qualified physicians using a structured reporting and management system. The ACR has developed a set of tools necessary for radiologists to take the lead on the front lines of lung cancer screening. The ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation is built upon the ACR CT accreditation program and requires use of Lung-RADS or a similar structured reporting and management system. This designation provides patients and referring providers with the assurance that they will receive high-quality screening with appropriate follow-up care.

ACR CT accreditation program and the lung cancer screening program designation.

The ACR recognizes that low-dose CT for lung cancer screening has the potential to significantly reduce mortality from lung cancer in the appropriate high-risk population. The ACR supports the recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for screening patients. To be effective, lung cancer screening should be performed at sites providing high-quality low-dose CT examinations overseen and interpreted by qualified physicians using a structured reporting and management system. The ACR has developed a set of tools necessary for radiologists to take the lead on the front lines of lung cancer screening. The ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation is built upon the ACR CT accreditation program and requires use of Lung-RADS or a similar structured reporting and management system. This designation provides patients and referring providers with the assurance that they will receive high-quality screening with appropriate follow-up care.

ROC curves for low-dose CT in the National Lung Screening Trial.

The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) reported a 20% reduction in lung cancer specific mortality using low-dose chest CT (LDCT) compared with chest radiograph (CXR) screening. The high number of false positive screens with LDCT (around 25%) raises concerns. NLST radiologists reported LDCT screens as either positive or not positive, based primarily on the presence of a 4+ mm non-calcified lung nodule (NCN). They did not explicitly record a propensity score for lung cancer. However, by using maximum NCN size, or alternatively, radiologists' recommendations for diagnostic follow-up categorized hierarchically, surrogate propensity scores (PSSZ and PSFR) were created. These scores were then used to compute ROC curves, which determine possible operating points of sensitivity versus false positive rate (1-Specificity). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.934 and 0.928 for PSFR and PSSZ, respectively; the former was significantly greater than the latter. With the NLST definition of a positive screen, sensitivity and specificity of LDCT was 93.1% and 76.5%, respectively. With cutoffs based on PSFR, a specificity of 92.4% could be achieved while only lowering sensitivity to 86.9%. Radiologists using LDCT have good predictive ability; the optimal operating point for sensitivity and specificity remains to be determined.

ACR appropriateness Criteria® chronic dyspnea: suspected pulmonary origin.

Dyspnea, described as breathlessness or shortness of breath, is usually caused by cardiopulmonary disease. The role of imaging in chronic dyspnea (>1 mo in duration) with suspected pulmonary origin is reviewed as suggested by the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Thoracic Imaging. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

National lung screening trial: variability in nodule detection rates in chest CT studies.

PURPOSE: To characterize the variability in radiologists' interpretations of computed tomography (CT) studies in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) (including assessment of false-positive rates [FPRs] and sensitivity), to examine factors that contribute to variability, and to evaluate trade-offs between FPRs and sensitivity among different groups of radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HIPAA-compliant NLST was approved by the institutional review board at each screening center; all participants provided informed consent. NLST radiologists reported overall screening results, nodule-specific findings, and recommendations for diagnostic follow-up. A noncalcified nodule of 4 mm or larger constituted a positive screening result. The FPR was defined as the rate of positive screening examinations in participants without a cancer diagnosis within 1 year. Descriptive analyses and mixed-effects models were utilized. The average odds ratio (OR) for a false-positive result across all pairs of radiologists was used as a measure of variability. RESULTS: One hundred twelve radiologists at 32 screening centers each interpreted 100 or more NLST CT studies, interpreting 72 160 of 75 126 total NLST CT studies in aggregate. The mean FPR for radiologists was 28.7% ± 13.7 (standard deviation), with a range of 3.8%-69.0%. The model yielded an average OR of 2.49 across all pairs of radiologists and an OR of 1.83 for pairs within the same screening center. Mean FPRs were similar for academic versus nonacademic centers (27.9% and 26.7%, respectively) and for centers inside (25.0%) versus outside (28.7%) the U.S. "histoplasmosis belt." Aggregate sensitivity was 96.5% for radiologists with FPRs higher than the median (27.1%), compared with 91.9% for those with FPRs lower than the median (P = .02). CONCLUSION: There was substantial variability in radiologists' FPRs. Higher FPRs were associated with modestly higher sensitivity.

ACR appropriateness criteria routine chest radiographs in intensive care unit patients.

Daily routine chest radiographs in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been a tradition for many years. Anecdotal reports of misplacement of life support items, acute lung processes, and extra pulmonary air collections in a small number of patients served as a justification for routine chest radiographs in the ICU. Having analyzed this practice, the ACR Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Thoracic Imaging has made the following recommendations: • When monitoring a stable patient or a patient on mechanical ventilation in the ICU, a portable chest radiograph is appropriate for clinical indications only. • It is appropriate to obtain a chest radiograph after placement of an endotracheal tube, central venous line, Swan-Ganz catheter, nasogastric tube, feeding tube, or chest tube. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The strongest data contributing to these recommendations were derived from a meta-analysis of 8 trials comprising 7,078 ICU patients by Oba and Zaza [1].

ACR appropriateness Criteria® radiographically detected solitary pulmonary nodule.

The solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) is a common medical problem for which management can be quite complex. Imaging remains at the center of management of SPNs, and computed tomography is the primary modality by which SPNs are characterized and followed up for stability. This manuscript summarizes the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria for radiographically detected solitary pulmonary nodules and briefly reviews the various imaging techniques available. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR appropriateness criteria(®)acute respiratory illness in immunocompromised patients.

The respiratory system is often affected by complications of immunodeficiency, typically manifesting clinically as acute respiratory illness. Ongoing literature reviews regarding the appropriateness of imaging in these patients are critical, as advanced medical therapies such as stem cell transplantation, chemotherapy, and immunosuppressive therapies for autoimmune disease continue to keep high the population of immunosuppressed patients in our health care system today. This ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) topic describes clinical scenarios of acute respiratory illness in immunocompromised patients with cough, dyspnea, chest pain, and fever; in those with negative, equivocal, or nonspecific findings on chest radiography; in those with diffuse or confluent opacities on chest radiography; and in those in whom noninfectious disease is suspected. The use of chest radiography, chest CT, transthoracic needle biopsy, and nuclear medicine imaging are all discussed in the contexts of these clinical scenarios. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® acute respiratory illness in immunocompetent patients.

Acute respiratory illness is defined as one or more of the following: cough, sputum production, chest pain, or dyspnea (with or without fever). The workup of these patients depends on many factors, including clinical presentation and the suspected etiology. This study reviews the literature on the indications and usefulness of radiologic studies for the evaluation of acute respiratory illness in the immunocompetent patient. The following recommendations are the result of evidence-based consensus by the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Thoracic Radiology. Chest radiographs are usually appropriate in (1) patients with positive physical examination or risk factors for pneumonia, (2) for the assessment of complicated pneumonia, or (3) in cases of emerging infections and biological warfare agents such as severe acute respiratory syndrome, H1N1, and anthrax. Computed tomography, although having a more limited role, is usually appropriate (1) in the assessment of complicated pneumonia and (2) in patients with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome, H1N1, or anthrax and a normal radiograph.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® screening for pulmonary metastases.

Screening for pulmonary metastatic disease is an important step for staging a patient with a known or recently discovered malignancy. Here we present our recommendations for screening for metastatic disease based on recommendations from the literature and experiences of pulmonary radiologists. In short, chest computed tomographic (CT) screening is the most appropriate tool for evaluation of pulmonary metastasis in the majority of cases. Chest computed tomographic screening is also recommended for follow-up and to determine response to therapy. Other modalities such as chest radiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and scintigraphy will also be discussed. Please note that this study is a summary of the complete version of this topic, which is available on the ACR website at www.acr.org. Practitioners are encouraged to refer to the complete version.

Medical students' preferences in radiology education a comparison between the Socratic and didactic methods utilizing powerpoint features in radiology education.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The Socratic method has long been a traditional teaching method in medicine and law. It is currently accepted as the standard of teaching in clinical wards, while the didactic teaching method is widely used during the first 2 years of medical school. There are arguments in support of both styles of teaching. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After attending a radiology conference demonstrating different teaching methods, third-year and fourth-year medical students were invited to participate in an online anonymous survey. RESULTS: Of the 74 students who responded, 72% preferred to learn radiology in an active context. They preferred being given adequate time to find abnormalities on images, with feedback afterward from instructors, and they thought the best approach was a volunteer-based system of answering questions using the Socratic method in the small group. They desired to be asked questions in a way that was constructive and not belittling, to realize their knowledge deficits and to have daily pressure to come prepared. The respondents thought that pimping was an effective teaching tool, supporting previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: When teaching radiology, instructors should use the Socratic method to a greater extent. Combining Socratic teaching with gentle questioning by an instructor through the use of PowerPoint is a preferred method among medical students. This information is useful to improve medical education in the future, especially in radiology education.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria hemoptysis.

Hemoptysis is defined as the expectoration of blood originating from the tracheobronchial tree or pulmonary parenchyma, ranging from 100 mL to 1 L in volume over a 24-hour period. This article reviews the literature on the indications and usefulness of radiologic studies for the evaluation of hemoptysis. The following recommendations are the result of evidence-based consensus by the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Expert Panel on Thoracic Radiology: (1) Initial evaluation of patients with hemoptysis should include a chest radiograph; (2) Patients at high risk for malignancy (>40 y old, >40 pack-year smoking history) with negative chest radiograph, computed tomography (CT) scan, and bronchoscopy can be followed with observation for the following 3 years. Radiography and CT are recommended imaging modalities for follow-up. Bronchoscopy may complement imaging during the period of observation; (3) In patients who are at high risk for malignancy and have suspicious chest radiograph findings, CT is suggested for initial evaluation; CT should also be considered in patients who are active or exsmokers, despite a negative chest radiograph; and (4) Massive hemoptysis can be effectively treated with either surgery or percutaneous embolization. Contrast-enhanced multidetector CT before embolization or surgery can define the source of hemoptysis as bronchial systemic, nonbronchial systemic, and/or pulmonary arterial. Percutaneous embolization may be used initially to halt the hemorrhage before definitive surgery.