Delayed Growth in Incidental Pancreatic Cysts: Are the Current American College of Radiology Recommendations for Follow-up Appropriate?

PURPOSE: To evaluate growth kinetics of asymptomatic small (<2 cm) incidental pancreatic cysts and to assess potential implications of these in the context of current American College of Radiology recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retrospective study with waiver of informed consent included patients with asymptomatic small incidental pancreatic cysts (diameter, 5-20 mm) with two or more magnetic resonance (MR) examinations performed at least 6 months apart at a tertiary institution. The largest cyst dimension was measured on T2-weighted single-shot fast spin-echo images by one of six radiologists (1-3 years of experience) who were trained to measure pancreatic cysts in a similar manner. All analysis was conducted at the patient level by choosing the cyst that exhibited the greatest growth over the follow-up period in each patient. Fisher exact, χ(2), and Kruskal-Wallis tests and analysis of variance were used to test correlation between cyst characteristics and growth. RESULTS: A total of 259 patients (mean age, 65 years ± 11 [standard deviation], male-to-female ratio, 42:58) with 370 asymptomatic small incidental pancreatic cysts were included. At presentation, median cyst size was 9.4 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 7.0-12.2 mm), and 64 patients (25%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 20, 30) had septations. The median imaging follow-up period was 2.2 years (IQR, 1.2-3.9 years; range, 0.5-11.0 years), with a median of three MR examinations (IQR, two to four examinations) per patient. In 171 (66%; 95% CI: 60, 72) of the 259 patients, cysts remained stable; in 18 (7%; 95% CI: 4, 11), cysts shrank; and in 70 (27%; 95% CI: 22, 33), cysts grew (median total growth and median annual growth of 4.8 mm and 2.3 mm/y, respectively). Age, cyst size, and cyst septation at presentation were not predictive of growth. Overall, 29 (11%), 16 (6%), and four (1.5%) of the cysts increased in size after 1, 2, and 3 years of initial stability, respectively. Of the 18 patients who underwent pancreatic surgery, only one patient with an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm had high-grade dysplasia. One patient developed pancreatic adenocarcinoma remotely at the location of the pancreatic cyst diagnosed 11 months prior. CONCLUSION: In the majority of patients, asymptomatic small incidental pancreatic cysts remained stable during a median follow-up period of 2.2 years; however, in 27% of patients, cysts increased in size over time, with 11% growing after an initial 1-year period of stability. Current American College of Radiology recommendations to discontinue imaging follow-up after 1 year of stability may need to be reevaluated.

Reviewing imaging examination results with a radiologist immediately after study completion: patient preferences and assessment of feasibility in an academic department.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess patient preferences about receiving radiology results and reviewing the images and findings directly with a radiologist after completion of an examination. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A prospective survey of English-speaking outpatients undergoing either nononcologic CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis or nonobstetric ultrasound examinations was completed between December 2010 and June 2011. Responses to survey items such as preferences regarding communication of results, knowledge of a radiologist, and anxiety level before and after radiologist-patient consultation were recorded. The average wait time between the end of the imaging examination and the consultation and the duration of consultation were documented. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients (43 men, 43 women; mean age, 52 years) underwent 37 CT and 49 ultrasound examinations). Forty-eight patients (56%) identified a radiologist as a physician who interprets images. Before imaging, 70 patients (81%) preferred hearing results from both the ordering provider and the radiologist. This percentage increased to 78 (91%) after consultation (p=0.03). Before consultation, 84 of the 86 patients (98%) indicated they would be comfortable hearing normal results or abnormal results from the person interpreting the examination; the number increased to 85 (99%) after consultation. Eighty-five patients (99%) agreed or strongly agreed that reviewing their examination findings with a radiologist was helpful. Eighty-four patients (98%) indicated they wanted the option of reviewing or always wanted to review future examination findings with a radiologist. After consultation, anxiety decreased in 41 patients (48%), increased in 13 (15%), and was unchanged in 32 (37%) (p=0.0001). The average wait for consultation and the duration of consultation were 9.9 and 10.4 minutes for CT and 1.2 and 7.1 minutes for ultrasound. CONCLUSION: Patients prefer hearing examination results from both their ordering provider and the interpreting radiologist. Most patients find radiologist consultation beneficial. Patients are comfortable hearing results from the radiologist, with most displaying decreased anxiety after consultation.

ACR appropriateness criteria jaundice.

A fundamental consideration in the workup of a jaundiced patient is the pretest probability of mechanical obstruction. Ultrasound is the first-line modality to exclude biliary tract obstruction. When mechanical obstruction is present, additional imaging with CT or MRI can clarify etiology, define level of obstruction, stage disease, and guide intervention. When mechanical obstruction is absent, additional imaging can evaluate liver parenchyma for fat and iron deposition and help direct biopsy in cases where underlying parenchymal disease or mass is found. Imaging techniques are reviewed for the following clinical scenarios: (1) the patient with painful jaundice, (2) the patient with painless jaundice, and (3) the patient with a nonmechanical cause for jaundice. 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 chorionic bump: a first-trimester pregnancy sonographic finding associated with a guarded prognosis.

OBJECTIVE: We describe a series of patients with a previously unreported sonographic finding, the chorionic "bump," which is an irregular, convex bulge from the choriodecidual surface into the first-trimester gestational sac. The pregnancy outcome is investigated in this series of patients and compared with the general population and infertility first-trimester control groups. METHODS: We prospectively noted a cohort of 15 cases with the chorionic bump on first-trimester sonograms (in a total of 2178 patients) performed over 3 years at our institution (prevalence, 0.7%). We then compared pregnancy outcomes against 2 pregnant control groups (15 general, noninfertility patients and 15 infertility patients) who were maternal age and gestational age matched to our patient group. RESULTS: The difference in outcomes between the patients with bumps and the healthy control subjects was statistically significant (7 live births versus 13 live births; P < .03), but the difference in outcomes between the patients with bumps and infertility control subjects was not statistically significant (7 live births versus 11 live births; P = .1). Bump size was not correlated with pregnancy outcome. In most patients with serial sonograms, the bump showed evolutionary changes typical for hematoma. CONCLUSIONS: The finding of a chorionic bump on the first-trimester sonogram is associated with a guarded prognosis for the early pregnancy (live birth rate <50%); it probably represents a small hematoma that bulges into the gestational sac, and, in our series, most patients had a history of infertility treatments.