Current Controversies in Radiology on Cost, Reimbursement, and Price Transparency: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Many believe that fundamental reform of the U.S. health care system is overdue and necessary given rising national health care expenditures, poor performance on key population health metrics, meaningful health disparities, concerns about potential financial toxicity of care, inadequate price transparency, pending insolvency of Medicare Part A, increasing commercial insurance premiums, and large uninsured and underinsured populations. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an independent congressional agency, believes that part of this reform includes redistribution of reimbursements away from specialties such as radiology. Thus, despite an increase in the Medicare population and spending, Medicare payments for medical imaging have been decreasing for years. Further, the No Surprises Act, a federal law intended to curb the problem of surprise medical billing, was repurposed in federal rulemaking to reduce reimbursement from commercial payers to certain specialties, including radiology. In this article, we examine challenges facing the U.S. health care system, focusing on cost, reimbursement, and price transparency and the role of radiology in addressing such challenges. Medical imaging is a minor contributor to national health care expenditures but has an outsized impact on patient care. The radiology community should work together to reinforce the value of medical imaging and reduce inappropriate utilization of low-value care.

Limitations of abdominopelvic CT and multiparametric MR imaging for detection of lymph node metastases prior to radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the performance of pre-surgery CT and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) to identify lymph node (LN) metastases in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC). Abdominopelvic CT and mpMRI are commonly used for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) staging. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the MUSIC registry identified patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) between 3/2012 and 7/2018. Patients were classified according to pre-surgery imaging modality. Primary outcomes were operating characteristics of CT and mpMRI for detection of pathologic LN involvement (pN1). RESULTS: A total of 10,250 patients underwent RP and 3924 patients (38.3%) underwent CT and/or mpMRI prior to surgery. Suspicion for LN involvement was identified on 2.3% CT and 1.9% mpMRI. Overall, 391 patients were pN1(3.8%), including 0.1% low-, 2.1% intermediate-, and 10.9% high-risk PCa patients. Of 235 pN1 patients that underwent CT prior, far more had negative (91.1%) than positive (8.9%) findings, yielding sensitivity: 8.9%, specificity: 98.3%, negative predictive value (NPV): 92.1%, and positive predictive value (PPV): 32.3% for CT with regard to LN metastases. Similarly, more patients with pN1 disease had negative mpMRI (81.0%) then suspicious or indeterminate MRI (19.0%), yielding sensitivity: 19.0%, specificity: 97.3%, NPV: 95.9%, and PPV: 26.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominopelvic CT and mpMRI have clear limitations in identifying LN metastases. Additional clinicopathologic features should be considered when making management decisions, as 2.1% and 10.9% with intermediate-and high-risk cancer had metastatic LNs. The majority of pN1 patients had a negative CT or a negative/indeterminate mpMRI prior to RP. Pelvic LN dissection should be performed in RP patients with intermediate- or high-risk PCa, independent of preoperative imaging results.

Utilizing time-driven activity-based costing to understand the short- and long-term costs of treating localized, low-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the costs of delivering care for men with prostate cancer remain poorly described, this article reports the results of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for competing treatments of low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Process maps were developed for each phase of care from the initial urologic visit through 12 years of follow-up for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), cryotherapy, high-dose rate (HDR) and low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and active surveillance (AS). The last modality incorporated both traditional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and multiparametric-MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. The costs of materials, equipment, personnel, and space were calculated per unit of time and based on the relative proportion of capacity used. TDABC for each treatment was defined as the sum of its resources. RESULTS: Substantial cost variation was observed at 5 years, with costs ranging from $7,298 for AS to $23,565 for IMRT, and they remained consistent through 12 years of follow-up. LDR brachytherapy ($8,978) was notably cheaper than HDR brachytherapy ($11,448), and SBRT ($11,665) was notably cheaper than IMRT, with the cost savings attributable to shorter procedure times and fewer visits required for treatment. Both equipment costs and an inpatient stay ($2,306) contributed to the high cost of RALP ($16,946). Cryotherapy ($11,215) was more costly than LDR brachytherapy, largely because of increased single-use equipment costs ($6,292 vs $1,921). AS reached cost equivalence with LDR brachytherapy after 7 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TDABC is feasible for analyzing cancer services and provides insights into cost-reduction tactics in an era focused on emphasizing value. By detailing all steps from diagnosis and treatment through 12 years of follow-up for low-risk prostate cancer, this study has demonstrated significant cost variation between competing treatments.

Safe Use of Contrast Media: What the Radiologist Needs to Know.

Iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media are used on a daily basis in most radiology practices. These agents often are essential to providing accurate diagnoses, and are nearly always safe and effective when administered correctly. However, reactions to contrast media do occur and can be life threatening. Therefore, it is critical for faculty and staff to know how reactions to contrast agents manifest and how to treat them promptly. The decline in renal function seen occasionally after intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agents is poorly understood and likely multifactorial, and its association with the contrast medium may be overemphasized. However, it is important that radiologists be aware of current understanding and strategies to decrease the incidence of renal dysfunction. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, a skin disease, is an adverse reaction related to use of some gadolinium-based contrast agents in patients with chronic renal failure. The types of gadolinium most often associated with this condition and the indications for withholding gadolinium are important and are discussed in this article. The use of enteric contrast agents and contrast agents during pregnancy and nursing are reviewed briefly. Current knowledge for safe use of contrast media and key concepts that all radiologists should know are summarized in this review.

Reducing barriers to timely MR imaging scheduling.

Scheduling a magnetic resonance (MR) imaging study at the authors' large health system in 2011 required considerable preparation before an appointment time was given to a patient. Difficulties in promptly scheduling appointments resulted from the varying time required for examinations, depending on the requested protocol, availability of appropriate MR imaging equipment, examination timing, prior insurance authorization verification, and proper patient screening. These factors contributed to a backlog of patients to schedule that regularly exceeded 300. A multidisciplinary process-improvement team was assembled to improve the turnaround time for scheduling an outpatient MR imaging examination (the interval between the time when the order was received and the time when the patient was informed about the MR imaging appointment). Process improvements targeted by the team included protocol turnaround time, schedule standardization, schedule intervals, examination timing, service standards, and scheduling redesign. Using lean methods and multiple plan-do-check-act cycles, the time to schedule an outpatient MR imaging examination improved from 117 hours to 33 hours, a 72% reduction, during the 9-month study period in 2011-2012. The number of patients in the scheduling queue was reduced by 90%. Overall MR imaging examinations within the specific patient population studied increased from 773 patient studies during the first month of intervention to 1444 studies the following month and averaged over 1279 patient studies per month throughout the study.

Current State of Peer Learning in Radiology: A Survey of ACR Members.

PURPOSE: Peer learning (PL) programs seek to improve upon the limitations of score-based peer review and incorporate modern approaches to improve patient care. The aim of this study was to further understand the landscape of PL among members of the ACR in the first quarter of 2022. METHODS: Members of the ACR were surveyed to evaluate the incidence, current practices, perceptions, and outcomes of PL in radiology practice. The survey was administered via e-mail to 20,850 ACR members. The demographic and practice characteristics of the 1,153 respondents (6%) were similar to those of the ACR radiologist membership and correspond to a normal distribution of the population of radiologists and can therefore be described as representative of that population. Therefore, the error range for the results from this survey is ±2.9% at a 95% confidence level. RESULTS: Among the total sample, 610 respondents (53%) currently use PL, and 334 (29%) do not. Users of PL are younger (mode age ranges, 45-54 years for users and 55-64 years for nonusers; P < .01), more likely to be female (29% vs 23%, P < .05), and more likely to practice in urban settings (52% vs 40%, P = .0002). Users of PL feel that it supports an improved culture of safety and wellness (543 of 610 [89%]) and fosters continuous improvement initiatives (523 of 610 [86%]). Users of PL are more likely than nonusers to identify learning opportunities from routine clinical practice (83% vs 50%, P < .00001), engage in programming inclusive of more team members, and implement more practice improvement projects (P < .00001). PL users' net promoter score of 65% strongly suggests that users of PL are highly likely to recommend the program to colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologists across a breadth of radiology practices are engaged in PL activities, which are perceived to align with emerging principles of improving health care and enhance culture, quality, and engagement.

Practice-Level Variation in the Decision to Biopsy Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 Lesions in Favorable-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To examine practice-level variation in the management of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3 lesions in men with favorable-risk prostate cancer (FRPC) considering or on active surveillance (AS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry for FRPC men (GG1 and low-volume GG2) undergoing MRI from January 2013 to March 2020. The primary outcome was to assess practice-level variation in time from MRI to biopsy and MRI to treatment for PI-RADS 3 lesions. Both MRIs obtained after the diagnostic biopsy and while on AS were included. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate biopsy-free survival for time from MRI to surveillance biopsy and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models identified clinical and demographic factors associated with time obtaining a biopsy after finding PI-RADS 3 lesions. RESULTS: We identified 3172 FRPC men with a MRI, of whom 473 had a PI-RADS 3. There was significant practice-level variation in biopsy rates among patients with PI-RADS 3 MRI results (log-rank test, P <.001), with biopsy-free probability at 6 months ranging from 28% to 69% (median: 59%). We were unable to identify factors with significant associations with time to biopsy. Conversely, there was less variation in time from PI-RADS 3 to treatment (log-rank test, P = .2), while several clinical factors had statistically-significant associations: age (P = .018), Prostate Specific Antigen-Density 0.1-0.2 (P = .035), ISUP-GG 2 (P = .002), and number of positive cores (P <.001), as expected. CONCLUSION: Urology practice, rather than GG or extent of biopsy positivity, is the largest factor affecting the decision for biopsy of PI-RADS 3 lesions in FRPC men considering or on AS. Future work to assist with decision-making and reduce variability is needed.

Best Practices and Critical Factors in a Successful Private Practice.

Independent private practice has historically been the predominant practice model in radiology. In the last two decades, this model has faced increasing pressures on both a micro and macro level, which threatens its existence. In the current health care environment, how does a practice stay independent? The authors address some of the critical factors needed for a successful practice. These factors are derived from the collective experience of the authors who are in private practice as well as best practices described in the literature. Strengths that already exist in the practice, opportunities that can be capitalized on, and looming or existing threats to the independence of a private group are discussed. Recommendations are provided on how to optimize an individual practice and reduce the risk of alternative practice penetration.

Management of prostate cancer after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate.

INTRODUCTION: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is effective in treating lower urinary tract symptoms from prostatic disease. We investigate the role of HoLEP in the management of patients with benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) and prostate cancer (CaP). METHODS: Retrospective review of data regarding all patients undergoing HoLEP at a single institution was performed. Pre- and postoperative PSA, multiparametric MRI, and pathology results were analyzed for those with CaP identified prior to or incidentally at HoLEP. RESULTS: From February 2016 to February 2020, 201 patients underwent HoLEP. Twelve patients had CaP diagnosed before HoLEP: 6 patients with GG1 are on active surveillance (AS), 3 of 4 intermediate-risk patients are on AS and 1 received treatment for disease progression, and both high-risk CaP patients achieved symptomatic benefit from HoLEP and are receiving systemic therapy for CaP. Twenty-one patients (11.1%) with incidentally detected CaP at HoLEP remain on AS or watchful waiting based on clinical scenario. CONCLUSION: Screening for CaP in HoLEP candidates with PSA and MRI is recommended given that >10% will have incidental CaP. After HoLEP for BPH/LUTS, patients with CaP can be surveilled with PSA and/or MRI. Further investigation is warranted to determine the durability of success of these approaches.

Transitioning From Peer Review to Peer Learning: Report of the 2020 Peer Learning Summit.

Since its introduction nearly 20 years ago, score-based peer review has not been shown to have meaningful impact on or be a valid measurement instrument of radiologist performance. A new paradigm has emerged, peer learning, which is a group activity in which expert professionals review one another's work, actively give and receive feedback in a constructive manner, teach and learn from one another, and mutually commit to improving performance as individuals, as a group, and as a system. Many radiology practices are beginning to transition from score-based peer review to peer learning. To address challenges faced by these practices, a 1-day summit was convened at Harvard Medical School in January 2020, sponsored by the ACR. Several important themes emerged. Elements considered key to a peer-learning program include broad group participation, active identification of learning opportunities, individual feedback, peer-learning conferences, link with process and system improvement activities, preservation of organizational culture, sequestration of peer-learning activities from evaluation mechanisms, and program management. Radiologists and practice leaders are encouraged to develop peer-learning programs tailored to their local practice environment and foster a positive organizational culture. Health system administrators should support active peer-learning programs in the place of score-based peer review. Accrediting organizations should formally recognize peer learning as an acceptable form of peer review and specify minimum criteria for peer-learning programs. IT system vendors should actively collaborate with radiology organizations to develop solutions that support the efficient and effective management of local peer-learning programs.

Do patients who undergo multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer benefit from additional staging imaging? Results from a statewide collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: Prostate cancer (CaP) staging traditionally includes computed tomography (CT) and technetium-99m bone scintigraphy (BS) for assessment of lymph node (LN) and bone metastases, respectively. In recent years, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been used in diagnostic assessment of CaP. We sought to compare the accuracy of mpMRI to CT and BS for pretreatment staging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry, we identified men undergoing pretreatment mpMRI in addition to CT and/or BS in 2012 to 2018. Imaging reports were classified as positive, negative, or equivocal for detection of LN and bone metastases. A best value comparator (BVC) was used to adjudicate metastatic status in the absence of pathologic data. mpMRI accuracy was calculated using pessimistic (equivocal=positive) and optimistic (equivocal = negative) interpretations. We compared the diagnostic performance of mpMRI, CT, and BS in detecting metastases. RESULTS: In total, 364 men underwent CT and mpMRI, and 646 underwent BS and mpMRI. Based on the BVC, 52 men (14%) harbored LN metastases and 38 (5.9%) harbored bone metastases. Sensitivity of mpMRI for LN metastases was significantly higher than CT (65-73% vs 38%, P < 0.005), and specificity of mpMRI and CT were 97% to 99% and 99% (P = 0.2-0.4), respectively. For bone metastases, BS sensitivity was 68% as compared to 42% to 71% (P = 0.02-0.83) for mpMRI. Specificity for bone metastases was 95% to 99% across all modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Using statewide data, mpMRI appears superior to CT and comparable to BS for detection of LN and bone metastases, respectively. Pretreatment mpMRI may obviate the need for additional staging imaging.

Diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus following femoral head harvest post-total hip arthroplasty.

Elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a routine procedure. Intraoperative harvesting of excised femoral heads for the purpose of donation during this procedure has become standard practice, in response to increasing bone allograft demand. Robust patient screening and femoral head analysis typically occurs, to minimize the risk of disease transmission to any potential recipient. Screening for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a virus normally first diagnosed through serological testing, makes up part of this process. This case describes a 43-year-old male who underwent elective THA, with subsequent analysis of the excised femoral head at time of screening revealing a diagnosis of HIV, a condition previously never detected in the donor. First diagnosis of HIV from bone is exceedingly rare, with this case illustrating an unusual diagnostic pathway of a well-understood condition, as well as representing an unfamiliar outcome following a common surgical intervention.

Leveraging Twitter to Maximize the Radiology Meeting Experience.

Over recent years, social media engagement has proliferated among physicians, health care systems, scientific journals, professional societies, and patients. In radiology, Twitter (Twitter Inc, San Francisco, California) has rapidly become the preferred social media engagement tool and is now an essential activity at many large radiology society meetings. Twitter offers a versatile, albeit simple, platform for anyone interested in engaging with others, regardless of title, stature, or geography. In radiology and other medical specialties, year-after-year increases in Twitter engagement before, during, and after professional society meetings continue with widespread positive feedback. This short-form messaging tool also allows users to connect and interact with high-impact individuals and organizations on an ongoing basis (rather than once a year during large meetings). Through live-polling, Twitter also has the power to gather global opinions on issues highly relevant to radiology's future, such as the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) or breast cancer screening. Also increasingly popular is "live-tweeting" of curated meeting content, which makes information from the meeting accessible to a global audience. Despite the promise of growing professional networks and enabling discussions that cross geographic boundaries, the risks of Twitter use during radiology meetings must be recognized and mitigated. These include posting of unpublished data without consent (eg, slide content captured on camera phones), propagation of misinformation, and copyright infringement. Despite these issues and with an eye towards professionalism, Twitter can nonetheless be used effectively to increase engagement among radiologists, radiology societies, and patients.

Determination of Prostate Volume: A Comparison of Contemporary Methods.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Prostate volume (PV) determination provides important clinical information. We compared PVs determined by digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with or without three-dimensional (3D) segmentation software, and surgical prostatectomy weight (SPW) and volume (SPV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective review from 2010 to 2016 included patients who underwent radical prostatectomy ≤1 year after multiparametric prostate MRI. PVs from DRE and TRUS were obtained from urology clinic notes. MRI-based PVs were calculated using bullet and ellipsoid formulas, automated 3D segmentation software (MRI-A3D), manual segmentation by a radiologist (MRI-R3D), and a third-year medical student (MRI-S3D). SPW and SPV were derived from pathology reports. Intraclass correlation coefficients compared the relative accuracy of each volume measurement. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were analyzed. Median PVs were DRE 35 mL, TRUS 35 mL, MRI-bullet 49 mL, MRI-ellipsoid 39 mL, MRI-A3D 37 mL, MRI-R3D 36 mL, MRI-S3D 36 mL, SPW 54 mL, SPV-bullet 47 mL, and SPV-ellipsoid 37 mL. SPW and bullet formulas had consistently large PV, and formula-based PV had a wider spread than PV based on segmentation. Compared to MRI-R3D, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 for MRI-S3D, 0.90 for MRI-ellipsoid, 0.73 for SPV-ellipsoid, 0.72 for MRI-bullet, 0.71 for TRUS, 0.70 for SPW, 0.66 for SPV-bullet, 0.38 for MRI-A3D, and 0.33 for DRE. CONCLUSIONS: With MRI-R3D measurement as the reference, the most reliable methods for PV estimation were MRI-S3D and MRI-ellipsoid formula. Automated segmentations must be individually assessed for accuracy, as they are not always truly representative of the prostate anatomy. Manual segmentation of the prostate does not require expert training.

Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Program Implementation and Impact: Initial Clinical Experience in a Community Based Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate is increasingly being performed at academic centers but implementation in community based health systems has lagged and literature regarding clinical impact in this setting is limited. We describe our experience developing a community based prostate magnetic resonance imaging program, including the evolution of interpretation and reporting methods, and the resulting clinical impact during a period of more than 5 years (August 2010 to December 2015). METHODS: Data collected for prostate magnetic resonance imaging included demographic, clinical, scanning, pathology and treatment/management information. Suspicion level on prostate magnetic resonance imaging was correlated with pathology results when available. Outcomes were compared across 3 reporting eras, ie early, mid and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2. RESULTS: A total of 537 prostate magnetic resonance images were obtained for diagnosed prostate cancer (60%) or screening (37%). During the study period the number of scans and ordering physicians increased. The proportion of patients with suspected extraprostatic extension (17.5%), lymph node metastasis (6.9%) and bone/other metastasis (4.3%) on prostate magnetic resonance imaging remained relatively constant. When stratified by era, there was a significant increase in low suspicion studies (p = 0.0002) and a trend toward a significant increase in cancer detection at biopsy (p = 0.09), reflecting increased specificity in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 era. CONCLUSIONS: While staging information with prostate magnetic resonance imaging was accurate early in the implementation of the program, lesion characterization improved with use of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 criteria and standardized reporting. Regular multidisciplinary participation in community based prostate magnetic resonance imaging programs may maximize clinical impact.

Integration and Diagnostic Accuracy of 3T Nonendorectal coil Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Context of Active Surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the integration of 3T nonendorectal coil multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) at 2 high-volume practices that routinely use mpMRI in the setting of active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, and dual-institution retrospective cohort study. Subjects undergoing 3T mpMRI without endorectal coil at either study institution over a 13-month period (August 1, 2015-August 31, 2016) were selected based on predefined criteria: clinical T1/T2 Gleason 6 prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen <15 ng/mL, ≥40 years old, mpMRI within 2 years of prostate biopsy, and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 score assigned. Subjects surveilled for Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer were excluded. The primary outcome was detection of Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer on magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy, standard biopsy, or prostatectomy within 6 months following mpMRI. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 286 subjects (N = 193 from institution 1, N = 93 from institution 2) met the criteria. Most (87% [90 of 104]) with maximum PI-RADS v2 scores of 1-2 did not receive immediate biopsy or treatment and remained on active surveillance. Incidence and PPVs for PI-RADS v2 scores of ≥3 were the following: PI-RADS 3 (n = 57 [20%], PPV 21% [6 of 29]), PI-RADS 4 (n = 96 [34%], PPV 51% [39 of 77]), and PI-RADS 5 (n = 29 [13%], PPV 71% [20 of 28]). No Gleason ≥4 + 3 prostate cancer was identified for PI-RADS v2 scores of 1-3 (0 of 43 with histology). Following mpMRI and subsequent biopsy, 21% (61 of 286) of subjects were removed from active surveillance and underwent definitive therapy. CONCLUSION: The 3T nonendorectal coil mpMRI has been integrated into the care of patients on active surveillance and effectively stratifies risk of Gleason ≥3 + 4 prostate cancer in this population.

Personal Branding: A Primer for Radiology Trainees and Radiologists.

A radiologist's personal brand is a composite of many parts in one's professional life. In an age where work quality and digital footprints are tracked and measured more than ever before, it behooves radiologists to develop and curate their own individual brands in effective ways. Personal branding consists of the decisions we make, both consciously and unconsciously, which affect our reputation and the likelihood of seeking our services in the future for both patients and referring providers. As hospital systems are increasingly adjusting their systems to cater to better patient experiences, it is imperative that radiologists similarly adjust our practice patterns to accommodate the needs of the new paradigm of value-based care. It is no longer sufficient to only practice excellent clinical radiology; one's service experience to clinical providers, report quality, and digital presence must all be robust and compelling. Defining your brand and promoting your vision and quality standards have become as important to radiologists' future as keeping up with advancements in radiologic technology. One must select the proper platforms and types of interactions in which to engage from available social media options. Developing a consistent brand and presence in the work setting, on social media accounts, and in professional organizations at the local, national, and international levels is the ultimate goal. At present, very little, if any, formal training is provided on personal branding skills such as these in current residency curricula, and it is critical for radiologists to fill their gaps in knowledge through additional means.

Canal to diaphysis ratio as a risk factor for hip fractures and hip fracture pattern.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis and related fractures constitute a significant burden on modern healthcare. The standard method of diagnosing osteoporosis with a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan is limited by accessibility and expense. The thickness of the cortex of the proximal femur on plain radiographs has been suggested to be a method for indicating osteoporosis and as a risk factor of hip fractures in the elderly. METHODS: A retrospective study was undertaken to assess the usefulness of the canal-diaphysis ratio (CDR) as a risk factor for developing a hip fracture, excluding patients presenting under 50 years old, following high-energy trauma or pathological fractures. The CDR was measured in 84 neck of femur (NOF) fracture patients and 84 intertrochanteric hip fracture patients, and these were subsequently compared to the CDR of 84 patients without a hip fracture. Measurements were taken on two occasions by two members of the orthopaedic team, so as to assess the test's inter- and intraobserver reliability. RESULTS: In comparison to those without a fracture, there was a significant difference in the CDR of patients with a NOF fracture (P < 0.0001) and intertrochanteric fracture (P < 0.0001). Furthermore, the odds of having a CDR above 60.67 and 64.41 were significantly higher in the NOF (OR = 2.214, P = 0.0129) and intertrochanteric fracture (OR = 32.27, P < 0.0001) groups respectively, when compared to the non-fractured group. The analysis of the test's inter- and intraobserver reliability showed strong levels of reproducibility. DISCUSSION: We concluded that a raised CDR was associated with an increased incidence of NOF and intertrochanteric hip fracture. Measuring the CDR can thus be considered as a reproducible and inexpensive method of identifying elderly patients at risk of hip fractures.