Association between opportunistic vertebral bone density measurements and new vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral cementoplasty: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: To study the relationship between opportunistic CT bone density measurements and the occurrence of new vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral cementoplasty (PVC) of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). METHODS: A prospective analysis of retrospective data of 275 patients with OVCF treated by PVC between 2014 and 2019 with a clinico-radiological follow-up one year after treatment was conducted. Opportunistic bone density measurements were obtained at the trabecular bone of the L1 or an adjacent vertebra in Hounsfield units performed on the preoperative CT study. These density measurements values ​​were then compared between patients with and without new OCVF and in various population subgroups. RESULTS: There were 275 patients included, with 53 (19%) presenting a new OCVF and 24 (9%) developing a fracture cascade. The median opportunistic density measurements ​​in patients with recurrent OCVF were lower than those without (median 52[40.5]) HU and 77[49] HU)(p < 0.00001). Among the patients with new OVCF the median opportunistic density measurements in patients with fracture cascades were also lower than those without (44 HU and 62 HU, respectively) (p < 0.0096). Patients with density measurements under 61 HU were 3.6 times more likely to present recurrent fractures and those with density under 54 HU were 9.8 times more likely to develop a fracture cascade. The 36 HU threshold yielded a high specificity (90-91%) for the prediction of recurrent fractures and fracture cascade but with low sensitivity (respectively 26% and 37%). CONCLUSION: Low opportunistic vertebral density measurements are associated with a higher risk of OVCF and fracture cascades after PVC. KEY POINTS: • Low opportunistic density measurements are associated with a higher risk of OVCF and fracture cascades after PVC. • Measuring bone density before performing a PVC could help predict the risk of new vertebral fracture after treatment • Patient management could be adapted according to bone density.

Initial Characterization of Focal Bone Lesions with Conventional Radiographs or Computed Tomography: Diagnostic Performance and Interobserver Agreement Assessment.

Objectives: To ascertain the role of CT and conventional radiographs for the initial characterization of focal bone lesions.Methods: Images from 184 patients with confirmed bone tumors included in an ethics committee-approved study were retrospectively evaluated. The reference for benign-malignant distribution was based on histological analysis and long-term follow-up. Radiographs and CT features were analyzed by 2 independent musculoskeletal radiologists blinded to the final diagnosis. Lesion margins, periosteal reaction, cortical lysis, endosteal scalloping, presence of pathologic fracture, and lesion mineralization were evaluated. Results: The benign-malignant distribution in the study population was 68.5-31.5% (126 benign and 58 malignant). In the lesions that could be seen in both radiographs and CT, the performance of these methods for the benign-malignant differentiation was similar (accuracy varying from 72.8% to 76.5%). The interobserver agreement for the overall evaluation of lesion aggressiveness was considerably increased on CT compared to radiographs (Kappa of .63 vs .22). With conventional radiographs, 18 (9.7%) and 20 (10.8%) of the lesions evaluated were not seen respectively by readers 1 and 2. Among these unseen lesions, 50%-61.1% were located in the axial skeleton. Compared to radiographs, the number of lesions with cortical lysis and endosteal scalloping was 26-34% higher with CT. Conclusion: Although radiographs remain the primary imaging tool for lesions in the peripheral skeleton, CT should be performed for axial lesions. CT imaging can assess the extent of perilesional bone lysis more precisely than radiographs with a better evaluation of lesion fracture risk.

Imaging in Hip Arthroplasty Management-Part 1: Templating: Past, Present and Future.

Hip arthroplasty is a frequently used procedure with high success rates. Its main indications are primary or secondary advanced osteoarthritis, due to acute fracture, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, and hip dysplasia. The goals of HA are to reduce pain and restore normal hip biomechanics, allowing a return to the patient's normal activities. To reach those goals, the size of implants must suit, and their positioning must meet, quality criteria, which can be determined by preoperative imaging. Moreover, mechanical complications can be influenced by implant size and position, and could be avoided by precise preoperative templating. Templating used to rely on standard radiographs, but recently the use of EOS® imaging and CT has been growing, given the 3D approach provided by these methods. However, there is no consensus on the optimal imaging work-up, which may have an impact on the outcomes of the procedure. This article reviews the current principles of templating, the various imaging techniques used for it, as well as their advantages and drawbacks, and their expected results.

Imaging in Hip Arthroplasty Management Part 2: Postoperative Diagnostic Imaging Strategy.

Hip arthroplasty (HA) is a frequently used procedure with high success rates, but 7% to 27% of the patients complain of persistent postsurgical pain 1 to 4 years post-operation. HA complications depend on the post-operative delay, the type of material used, the patient's characteristics, and the surgical approach. Radiographs are still the first imaging modality used for routine follow-up, in asymptomatic and painful cases. CT and MRI used to suffer from metallic artifacts but are nowadays central in HA complications diagnosis, both having their advantages and drawbacks. Additionally, there is no consensus on the optimal imaging workup for HA complication diagnosis, which may have an impact on patient management. After a brief reminder about the different types of prostheses, this article reviews their normal and pathologic appearance, according to each imaging modality, keeping in mind that few abnormalities might be present, not anyone requiring treatment, depending on the clinical scenario. A diagnostic imaging workup is also discussed, to aid the therapist in his imaging studies prescription and the radiologist in their practical aspects.

Assessment of Compliance and Impact of the COVID-19 RSNA Recommendations on Radiology Departments: A French Survey.

Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Tuite in this issue.

Clinical acceptance of deep learning reconstruction for abdominal CT imaging: objective and subjective image quality and low-contrast detectability assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the image quality and clinical acceptance of a deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithm compared to traditional iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms. METHODS: CT acquisitions were performed with two phantoms and a total of nine dose levels. Images were reconstructed with two types of IR algorithms, DLR and filtered-back projection. Spatial resolution, image texture, mean noise value, and objective and subjective low-contrast detectability were compared. Ten senior radiologists evaluated the clinical acceptance of these algorithms by scoring ten CT exams reconstructed with the DLR and IR algorithms evaluated. RESULTS: Compared to MBIR, DLR yielded a lower noise and a higher low-contrast detectability index at low doses (CTDIvol ≤ 2.2 and ≤ 4.5 mGy, respectively). Spatial resolution and detectability at higher doses were better with MBIR. Compared to HIR, DLR yielded a higher spatial resolution, a lower noise, and a higher detectability index. Despite these differences in algorithm performance, significant differences in subjective low-contrast performance were not found (p ≥ 0.005). DLR texture was finer than that of MBIR and closer to that of HIR. Radiologists preferred DLR images for all criteria assessed (p < 0.0001), whereas MBIR was rated worse than HIR (p < 0.0001) in all criteria evaluated, except for noise (p = 0.044). DLR reconstruction time was 12 times faster than that of MBIR. CONCLUSION: DLR yielded a gain in objective detection and noise at lower dose levels with the best clinical acceptance among the evaluated reconstruction algorithms. KEY POINTS: • DLR yielded improved objective low-contrast detection and noise at lower dose levels. • Despite the differences in objective detectability among the algorithms evaluated, there were no differences in subjective detectability. • DLR presented significantly higher clinical acceptability scores compared to MBIR and HIR.

Elbow Stiffness Imaging: A Practical Diagnostic and Pretherapeutic Approach.

Loss of elbow motion can lead to disability in everyday gestures, recreational activities, and work. Unfortunately, the elbow joint is particularly prone to stiffness because of its complex anatomy and biomechanics. The etiology of elbow stiffness is varied and must be diagnosed accurately in order to allow optimal treatment, which may be challenging for surgeons and physiotherapists. Its treatment can be either conservative, arthroscopic or surgical, with a trend for arthroscopic procedures when conservative treatment fails. There is no consensus on the optimal imaging workup for elbow joint stiffness, which may have an impact on patient management. This article reviews the current classification systems of elbow stiffness and the various imaging techniques used for diagnosis. Report checklists and clarifications on the role of each imaging method, as well as the imaging findings of normal and stiff elbows, are presented, leading to a proposed diagnostic algorithm. The main concern in imaging is to determine the cause of elbow stiffness, as many concomitant abnormalities might be present depending on the clinical scenario.

Ultra-high resolution computed tomography of joints: practical recommendations for acquisition protocol optimization.

BACKGROUND: To assess the influence on the spatial resolution of various Ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (CT) parameters and provide practical recommendations for acquisition protocol optimization in musculoskeletal imaging. METHODS: All acquisitions were performed with an Ultra-high resolution scanner, and variations of the following parameters were evaluated: field-of-view (150-300 mm), potential (80-140 KVp), current (25-250 mAs), focal spot size (0.4×0.5 to 0.8×1.3 mm2), slice thickness (0.25-0.5 mm), reconstruction matrix (512×512 to 2048×2048), and iso-centering (up to 85 mm off-center). Two different image reconstruction algorithms were evaluated: hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). CATPHAN 600 phantom images were analyzed to calculate the number of visible line pairs per centimeter (lp/cm). Task transfer function (TTF) curves were calculated to quantitatively evaluate spatial resolution. Cadaveric knee acquisitions were also performed. RESULTS: Under the conditions studied, the factor that most intensely influenced spatial resolution was the matrix size (additional visualization of up to 8 lp/cm). Increasing the matrix from 512×512 to 2048×2048 led to a 28.2% increase in TTF10% values with a high-dose protocol and a 5.6% increase with a low-dose protocol with no change in the number of visually distinguishable line pairs. The second most important factor affecting spatial resolution was the tube output (29.6% TTF10% gain and 5 additional lp/cm visualized), followed by the reconstruction algorithm choice and lateral displacement (both with a 4 lp/cm gain). Decreasing the slice thickness from 0.5 to 0.25 mm, led to an increase of 3 lp/cm (from 17 to 20 lp/cm) and a 17.3% increase in TTF10% values with no change in the "in-plane" spatial resolution. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides practical recommendations for spatial resolution optimization using Ultra-high-resolution CT.

Hallux sesamoid complex imaging: a practical diagnostic approach.

A wide variety of pathologies can affect the hallux sesamoid complex of the foot, including traumatic, micro traumatic, degenerative, inflammatory, vascular, infectious, and neoplastic conditions. Symptoms are quite nonspecific, mainly related to pain in the plantar surface of the first metatarsal head. In this context, imaging is important for the etiologic diagnosis of hallux sesamoid complex pathology with implications in patient management. The hallux sesamoid complex has a complex anatomy, and pathologic processes of this region are poorly known of radiologists. Besides, some entities such as "sesamoiditis" remain poorly defined in the literature. Schematically, conditions affecting sesamoids will be divided into two major groups: intrinsic anomalies (sesamoid bone being the center of the pathologic process) and extrinsic anomalies (diseases secondarily involving sesamoid bones). Thus, in this article, after a review of anatomical key points and pathologies affecting the hallux sesamoid complex, a practical multimodality approach for the diagnosis of hallux sesamoid pathologies will be proposed.

Alternative PACS interface devices are well-accepted and may reduce radiologist's musculoskeletal discomfort as compared to keyboard-mouse-recording device.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of two alternative picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) interface devices (a graphics tablet and a handheld controller) in clinical practice and on task-oriented exercises. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eleven senior radiologists were prospectively evaluated. The participants used the two tested interface devices for 10 working periods each and answered a questionnaire to evaluate the ergonomics of this experience. The prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal discomfort with the standard PACS interface set (mouse-keyboard-recording device) and these two devices was assessed. Exercises evaluating image scrolling and selection, image zooming and panning, image windowing, performing measurements, and reporting were performed with the standard PACS interface set and with the two tested devices. The sitting posture and hand position were evaluated. RESULTS: The general appreciation of the two alternative interface devices was considered to be similar to that of the standard interface set. The ergonomics of the handheld controller was considered to be slightly better than that of the standard interface set. The prevalence of musculoskeletal discomfort was 81%, 45%, and 18% for the standard interface set, graphics tablet, and handheld controller, respectively. With the graphics tablet and the handheld controller in 45% and 60%, respectively, there was a working posture change with respect to the standard interface set. The mean total exercise completion times of both tested devices were 27% higher than that of the standard interface set. CONCLUSION: Despite the increase in completion time of the task-oriented exercises, the tested devices were well accepted and considered to be more comfortable than the standard set. KEY POINTS: • Alternative PACS interface devices can be used as a substitute for the standard mouse-keyboard-recording device set with a potential improvement in work ergonomics and a reduction in work-related musculoskeletal discomfort.

[Parental representations of children's acute appendicitis and impact on its surgical management in three departments]. / Représentations parentales de l'appendicite de l'enfant et leurs conséquences sur le traitement chirurgical.

INTRODUCTION: Appendicitis is well known by the general and medical population. Yet, the number of appendectomies varies by a factor of one to four depending on French departments.Purpose of research: This study aimed to compare, according to French schooling departments, the representations and attitudes of parents facing abdominal pain of their children, and their use of health care system. We selected three departments which have different proportions of use of appendectomy according to the DRESS's rapport of 2014. Meurthe-et-Moselle's rank is between 15.65 and 23.48/10 000 people, Seine-et-Marne's rank is between 23.48 and 31.30/10 000, and Jura's rank is superior to 31/10 000. RESULTS: 797 questionnaires were analyzed (45.2%). Significant differences exist in the answers of the three departments. Residents of the Jura region and, in a lesser measure, Seine-et-Marnaises answered differently than Meurthe-et-Mosellanses. The first two were the populations who experienced the most appendectomies and the Meurthe-et-Mosellanses the least. Parents who lived in departments of high rank of appendectomy thought more of acute appendicitis when confronted with their children's abdominal pain, and feared less of appendectomy. They were also more in favor of surgical treatment than parents from Meurthe-et-Moselle. CONCLUSION: Knowledge, attitude and use of health care system seem to influence management of acute appendicitis in children's population and can explain, at least partially, the variations of the appendectomy rate in France. Targeted information for physicians may improve the understanding of patients and reassure them if needed in the purpose of reducing this factor of influence of practices.