RESUMO
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical utility of computerized tomography (CT) of the abdomen in the emergent setting of left upper quadrant pain. One hundred patients (average age: 45, range: 19-93 years, female: 57 %, male: 43 %) who presented to the emergency department (ED) and underwent CT scanning of abdomen with the given indication of left upper quadrant pain were included in this study. The results from CT examinations were compared to final diagnoses determined by either ED physician or clinician on a follow-up visit. Sensitivity of CT was 69 % (95 %CI: 52-83 %) for 39 patients who eventually were diagnosed with an acute abdominal abnormality. Twenty-seven patients had an acute abnormal finding on abdominal CT that represented the cause of the patient's pain (positive predictive value of 100 %, 95 %CI: 87-100 %). Of the remaining 73 patients with negative CT report, 12 were diagnosed clinically (either in the ED or on follow-up visit to specialist) with a pathology that was undetectable on the CT imaging (negative predictive value of 83 %, 95 %CI: 73-91 %). None of the remaining 61 patients with negative CT were found to have pathology by clinical evaluation (specificity of 100 %, 95 %CI: 94-100 %). CT is a useful examination for patients with acute left upper quadrant pain in the emergency department setting with moderate sensitivity and excellent specificity.
Assuntos
Dor Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Meios de Contraste , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Humanos , Iopamidol , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
During the annual 46th annual American Alliance of Academic Chief Residents in Radiology (A(3)CR(2)) meeting in New Orleans, chief residents discussed the role of residents within American College of Radiology 3.0 campaign. Our discussion was directed toward the evolving role of fourth-year radiology residents and how we might improve their training to better prepare them to add value as both leaders and radiologists. The ideas resulting from our Problem Solving session were divided into three categories: clinical presence in the wards and subspecialty clinics; visibility to clinicians and patients; and the education of medical students, residents, and advanced practice clinicians to aid in realizing the long-term goals of Imaging 3.0.