The disproportionate impact of peer learning on emergency radiology.

PURPOSE: The use of peer learning methods in radiology continues to grow as a means to constructively learn from past mistakes. This study examined whether emergency radiologists receive a disproportionate amount of peer learning feedback entered as potential learning opportunities (PLO), which could play a significant role in stress and career satisfaction. Our institution offers 24/7 attending coverage, with emergency radiologists interpreting a wide range of X-ray, ultrasound and CT exams on both adults and pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Peer learning submissions entered as PLO at a single large academic medical center over a span of 3 years were assessed by subspecialty distribution and correlated with the number of attending radiologists in each section. Total number of studies performed on emergency department patients and throughout the hospital system were obtained for comparison purposes. Data was assessed using analysis of variance and post hoc analysis. RESULTS: Emergency radiologists received significantly more (2.5 times) PLO submissions than the next closest subspeciality division and received more yearly PLO submissions per attending compared to other subspeciality divisions. This was found to still be true when normalizing for increased case volumes; Emergency radiologists received more PLO submissions per 1000 studies compared to other divisions in our department (1.59 vs. 0.85, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Emergency radiologists were found to receive significantly more PLO submissions than their non-emergency colleagues. Presumed causes for this discrepancy may include a higher error rate secondary to wider range of studies interpreted, demand for shorter turn-around times, higher volumes of exams read per shift, and hindsight bias in the setting of follow-up review.

Management of Severe Allergic-Like Contrast Media Reactions: Pitfalls and Strategies, From the AJR Special Series on Contrast Media.

Adverse reactions to contrast media are often high-acuity events that are uncommon potentially life-threatening. Nonetheless, these events are treatable, and radiologists may be called upon to manage a contrast media reaction. However, because these events are infrequent, they are prone to management errors. This article highlights common pitfalls and practical tips for the management of acute contrast media reactions in children and adults. Recognition of frequent management errors and implementation of the mitigation strategies presented can ameliorate risk and improve patient outcomes. These measures include proper training on reaction management and medication administration, the prompt use of IM epinephrine autoinjectors whenever a severe allergic-like reaction is suspected, the use of visual aids for quick reference in the setting of a reaction, and the recognition of adverse events that are not allergic-like reactions, which commonly require only supportive care.

Practice Management Strategies for Imaging Facilities Facing an Acute Iodinated Contrast Media Shortage.

An unanticipated but severe shortage in iodinated contrast media (ICM) is currently affecting imaging practices across the globe and is expected to persist through at least the end of June 2022. This supply shock may lead health care systems to experience an acute imaging crisis, given that many affected facilities have contrast agent supplies that are anticipated to last only a week or two under normal operating conditions. To maximize the opportunity to continue to provide optimal care for patients with emergent or life-threatening imaging indications and thereby minimize the overall impact on patient care, practice leaders will need to quickly assess their contrast material inventories, prioritize examination indications, and reduce their expected short-term usage of ICM. This Clinical Perspective reviews ICM conservation techniques that the Yale School of Medicine has deployed or is considering deploying, depending on the severity and length of the supply shortage.

What Patients Want to Know about Imaging Examinations: A Multiinstitutional U.S. Survey in Adult and Pediatric Teaching Hospitals on Patient Preferences for Receiving Information before Radiologic Examinations.

Purpose To identify what information patients and parents or caregivers found useful before an imaging examination, from whom they preferred to receive information, and how those preferences related to patient-specific variables including demographics and prior radiologic examinations. Materials and Methods A 24-item survey was distributed at three pediatric and three adult hospitals between January and May 2015. The χ2 or Fisher exact test (categorical variables) and one-way analysis of variance or two-sample t test (continuous variables) were used for comparisons. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine associations between responses and demographics. Results Of 1742 surveys, 1542 (89%) were returned (381 partial, 1161 completed). Mean respondent age was 46.2 years ± 16.8 (standard deviation), with respondents more frequently female (1025 of 1506, 68%) and Caucasian (1132 of 1504, 75%). Overall, 78% (1117 of 1438) reported receiving information about their examination most commonly from the ordering provider (824 of 1292, 64%), who was also the most preferred source (1005 of 1388, 72%). Scheduled magnetic resonance (MR) imaging or nuclear medicine examinations (P < .001 vs other examination types) and increasing education (P = .008) were associated with higher rates of receiving information. Half of respondents (757 of 1452, 52%) sought information themselves. The highest importance scores for pre-examination information (Likert scale ≥4) was most frequently assigned to information on examination preparation and least frequently assigned to whether an alternative radiation-free examination could be used (74% vs 54%; P < .001). Conclusion Delivery of pre-examination information for radiologic examinations is suboptimal, with half of all patients and caregivers seeking information on their own. Ordering providers are the predominant and preferred source of examination-related information, with respondents placing highest importance on information related to examination preparation. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Benefit of a Visual Aid in the Management of Moderate-Severity Contrast Media Reactions.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare management of moderate-severity reactions with and without a visual aid or flowchart in contrast medium reaction simulations. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All attending radiologists and trainees were requested to participate in a contrast medium reaction simulation program, including a moderate-severity reaction scenario, and were randomized to groups having or not having a visual aid. The time to administer intramuscular (IM) epinephrine via automated injector and errors in administration were recorded. After the simulation, all participants completed a survey assessing their comfort in treating reactions to contrast media with and without a visual aid. RESULTS: A total of 138 participants were divided into 21 sessions in the program, with 68 participants in the moderate-severity reaction scenario. Eleven groups were provided a visual aid; 10 groups were not. Errors in management occurred in 18.2% (2 of 11) of groups with visual aids versus 40% (4 of 10) in groups without (p = 0.35), with epinephrine self-administration reflecting the most common error. Excluding the groups with errors, the mean time to administration of IM epinephrine was 97 seconds with versus 152 seconds without the visual aid (p = 0.04). Of the 138 participants, 97.8% agreed that the poster would aid in medication administration, and 87% agreed that it would help decrease time to administer medications. CONCLUSION: A visual aid increased the subjective confidence of radiologists in the dose and route of medication administration in the contrast medium reaction simulation and led to faster administration of epinephrine. Self-administration IM epinephrine errors were common and seen in both groups.

MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Category 5 Lesions Found False-Positive at Multiparametric Prostate MRI.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine imaging and clinical features associated with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) category 5 lesions identified prospectively at multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) that were found benign at MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and July 2016, 325 men underwent prostate mpMRI followed by MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy of 420 lesions prospectively identified and assessed with PI-RADS version 2. The frequency of clinically significant prostate cancer (defined as Gleason score ≥ 7) among PI-RADS 5 lesions was determined. Lesions with benign pathologic results were retrospectively reassessed by three abdominal radiologists and categorized as concordant or discordant between mpMRI and biopsy results. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with benign disease. Bonferroni correction was used. RESULTS: Of the 98 PI-RADS 5 lesions identified in 89 patients, 18% (18/98) were benign, 10% (10/98) were Gleason 6 disease, and 71% (70/98) were clinically significant prostate cancer. Factors associated with benign disease at multivariate analysis were lower prostate-specific antigen density (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; p < 0.001) and apex (OR, 3.54; p = 0.001) or base (OR, 7.11; p = 0.012) location. On secondary review of the 18 lesions with benign pathologic results, 39% (7/18) were scored as benign prostatic hyperplasia nodules, 28% (5/18) as inflammatory changes, 5% (1/18) as normal anatomic structures, and 28% (5/18) as discordant with imaging findings. CONCLUSION: PI-RADS 5 lesions identified during routine clinical interpretation are associated with a high risk of clinically significant prostate cancer. A benign pathologic result was significantly correlated with lower prostate-specific antigen density and apex or base location and most commonly attributed to a benign prostatic hyperplasia nodule. Integration of these clinical features may improve the interpretation of high-risk lesions identified with mpMRI.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features of Endometrial Polyps: Frequency of Occurrence and Interobserver Reliability.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features and interobserver agreement of endometrial polyps. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, our database was searched for women older than 18 years who underwent MRI pelvis and pelvic surgical intervention from 2012 to 2016. Seventy-two patients with polyps and 75 controls composed the study cohort. Two radiologists evaluated the MRIs retrospectively for polyps. Polyp characteristics and enhancement were assessed. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity of readers 1 and 2 were 59.7% and 88.0%, and 44.4 and 96.0%, respectively. There was moderate agreement for presence of polyps (κ = 0.556, P ≤ 0001), T2 fibrous core, and intratumoral cysts, with slight agreement for T2 signal and enhancement. Polyp size moderately correlated with pathology (κ = 0.465 [P = 0.025] for reader 1, κ = 0.562 [P = 0.029] for reader 2). The most common enhancement was same as myometrium. CONCLUSION: Magnetic resonance imaging is moderately sensitive for detecting endometrial polyps, demonstrating features that are not sensitive but can be specific, with moderate interobserver agreement.

JOURNAL CLUB: Benefit of Epinephrine Autoinjector for Treatment of Contrast Reactions: Comparison of Errors, Administration Times, and Provider Preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Given the rarity of contrast reactions in practice, most radiologists have little to no experience in their management, and errors are common. The purpose of this study was to compare treatment of a moderate-severity reaction with intramuscular epinephrine by either the traditional manual method of drawing up and delivering epinephrine with a needle and syringe or the use of an epinephrine autoinjector. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All diagnostic radiologists at the study institution were requested to participate in an annual contrast reaction simulation program, which consisted of three simulation scenarios in a high-fidelity simulation laboratory. During the moderate-severity simulation scenario, the time to administer intramuscular epinephrine and any errors in administration were recorded. Groups were randomized to use an autoinjector device or manual delivery. All participants completed a survey assessing the experience with epinephrine and their comfort in treating contrast reactions using a traditional manual approach versus an epinephrine autoinjector. RESULTS: Among 189 participants in the contrast reaction simulation program, 76 participated in a moderate-severity reaction simulation two to five at a time in 25 sessions. Mean total time to administration was significantly longer for manual (108.8 seconds) than for autoinjector (38.7 seconds) delivery (p < 0.001). There were 11 errors in the manual group and one error in the autoinjector group (p = 0.005). Ninety-four percent of participants reported feeling very comfortable or comfortable with the autoinjector as opposed to 60% for manual delivery (p < 0.001). Overall, 96% of participants thought the autoinjector was easier to use. CONCLUSION: Use of an epinephrine autoinjector for treatment of contrast reactions was associated with a significantly greater degree of provider comfort, shorter time to administration, and fewer errors.

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.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Sonography in the Diagnosis of Placental Invasion.

OBJECTIVES: To compare older and newer magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria for placental invasion and to compare the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRI and sonography in determining the depth of placental invasion. METHODS: Forty pregnant patients at high risk for morbidly adherent placenta based on prenatal sonography underwent MRI evaluations. Two reviewers, who were blinded to the original MRI and sonographic interpretations, clinical history, and obstetric/pathologic findings, reviewed the MRI examinations. The MRI and sonographic scans were analyzed for the presence and depth of invasion. The MRI scans were tabulated for the presence of dark intraplacental T2 bands, bulging of the myometrium, increased vascularity, and indistinct myometrium, loss of the dark T2 myometrial/placental interface, and a thin myometrium. The obstetric/pathologic results served as the reference standards. RESULTS: Eighteen of 40 patients had a morbidly invasive placenta. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MRI and sonography were not significantly different. The accuracy rates for determining the depth of placental invasion by readers 1 and 2 were 0.65 and 0.55, respectively (P > .05). According to the Cohen κ statistic, there was a good inter-reader agreement between the MRI readers in assessing the depth of placental invasion (κ = 0.45). The features most commonly seen were dark T2 bands, bulging of the uterus, and loss of the dark T2 interface, which were all associated with the presence of placental invasion. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of placental invasion remains challenging on sonography and MRI, which perform similarly. The presence of 2 or more criteria adds specificity to the diagnosis of placental invasion on MRI.

Deferral of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Testing Before Contrast-Enhanced CT in Low-Risk Emergency Department Patients: Assessment of Safety and Impact on Throughput.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and utility of deferring estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) testing before contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) in low-risk emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: A new question was added to CECT order screens, allowing ordering ED providers to defer eGFR testing in patients deemed low risk for contrast-induced acute kidney injury (AKI). Low risk was defined as no known chronic kidney disease (CKD) or risk factors for AKI or CKD. Patients on chronic dialysis were deemed low risk. The project included three phases: baseline, pilot (optional order question), and full implementation (required order question). Outcomes were operational throughput metrics of CECT order to protocol (O to P) and order to begin (O to B) times. As a balancing safety measure, the proportion of patients deemed to be "low risk" and subsequently found to have eGFR value less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 was reported. RESULTS: A total of 16,446 CECT studies were included from four EDs. In the pilot phase, provider engagement rates with the question were low (5%-14%). After full implementation, median O to P time improved from 23.93 min at baseline to 13.02 (P < .0001) and median O to B time improved from 80.34 min to 76.48 (P = .0002). In 0.3% (2 of 646) studies, CECT was completed in patients categorized as low risk by the ED provider with subsequently resulted eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. DISCUSSION: Upfront clinical risk assessment for AKI and CKD by ED providers can be used to safely defer eGFR testing and improve operational performance for patients requiring CECT.

CT angiography in potential living kidney donors: 80 kVp versus 120 kVp.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to retrospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy, image quality, and radiation dose of renal artery CT angiography (CTA), at 80 kVp compared with 120 kVp, in adult kidney donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CTA examinations of 258 consecutive potential kidney donors were retrospectively evaluated; 189 patients were scanned using 64-MDCT scanners (higher maximal tube current), and 69 patients were scanned using 16-MDCT scanners (lower maximal tube current). On the basis of the tube potential and scanners, the study population was divided into four groups. Qualitative and quantitative analysis include vascular attenuation measurements, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) was recorded, and size-specific dose estimate was also estimated. RESULTS: Using 80 kVp for the 16-MDCT scanner, there was a 64.9% reduction in size-specific dose estimate (66.1% reduction in CTDIvol), increased noise, and tube current saturation in all cases. Axial image quality was significantly lower compared with that obtained at 120 kVp (p = 0.02), but image quality and visibility of renal artery branch order were comparable. Using 80 kVp for the 64-MDCT scanner, there was a 40.5% reduction in size-specific dose estimate (43.6% reduction in CTDIvol) and increased SNR and CNR (p < 0.001). No significant differences in 3D image quality and branch order visibility were observed. Tube current saturation was reached in 31% of cases. One hundred fifty-one patients (86 imaged at 80 kVp and 65 imaged at 120 kVp) underwent donor nephrectomy; CTA diagnostic accuracy was 100%. CONCLUSION: Renal artery CTA using 80 kVp combined with limiting the tube current results in a significant reduction in radiation dose and improved SNR and CNR, without deterioration of image quality.

A Survey of Practicing Radiologists on the Use of Premedication Before Intravenous Iodinated Contrast Medium Administration.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether updated guidance by the ACR in 2017 advocating use of intravenous (IV) premedication in emergency department (ED) patients and inpatients with reported iodinated contrast allergy was associated with a change in clinical practice. METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed via e-mail in October 2020 to practicing radiologist members of the ACR interrogating use of corticosteroid premedication for two clinical vignettes: an indicated routine (perform within 24 hours) inpatient contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT) and an indicated urgent (perform within 6 hours) ED CE-CT. In both scenarios, the patient had a prior moderate hypersensitivity reaction to iodinated contrast media. Clinical management was evaluated. Data were compared to historical controls from 2009. RESULTS: The response rate was 11% (724 of 6,616). For the inpatient scenario, 72% (518 of 724) would use corticosteroid premedication with CE-CT, and 28% (200 of 724) would perform noncontrast CT. For the ED scenario, 67% (487 of 724) would use corticosteroid premedication with CE-CT, and 30% (217 of 724) would perform noncontrast CT. Oral premedication (85%, 439 of 518) was preferred for routine inpatients, and rapid IV premedication (89%, 433 of 487) was preferred for urgent ED patients. Of those who provided rapid IV dosing data in the ED, two doses of corticosteroids were used by 53% (216 of 410) and one dose was used by 45% (185 of 410), with academic radiologists more likely than private or hybrid practice radiologists to administer two doses (74% [74 of 100] versus 48% [151 of 312], P < .001, odds ratio, 3.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.84-5.00). Rapid IV premedication was more commonly used in 2020 than in 2009 (60% [433 of 724] versus 29% [20 of 69], P < .001, odds ratio, 3.65; 95% confidence interval, 2.12-6.26). Antihistamine use was common in both inpatient (93%, 480 of 518) and ED settings (92%, 447 of 487). Only 32% (229 of 721) of radiologists practiced in accordance with ACR guidelines, suggesting no need for routine premedication before CE-CT in patients with prior severe hypersensitivity reaction to gadolinium-based contrast media. Nonetheless, most (93%, 670 of 724) said the ACR Manual on Contrast Media was a major determinant of their practice. CONCLUSIONS: Use of rapid IV premedication in urgent settings has increased since 2009, following updated ACR guidelines, but there is disagreement over whether one or two corticosteroid doses is required. Despite reported high reliance on ACR guidelines, deviations from those guidelines remain common. In general, when ACR guidelines were not followed, it was in a risk-averse direction.

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.

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.

Incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing contrast-enhanced CT.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) and the effects of associated risk factors in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) with IV administration of nonionic iodinated contrast agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective review of medical records identified patients with a diagnosis of myeloma who underwent a CECT examination of the chest, abdomen, or pelvis between January 1, 2005, and December 1, 2008. Analysis for CIN, as defined by an increase in creatinine level after the CECT examination of 25% or more, or of 0.5 mg/dL, compared with the level before the CECT examination, both within 48 hours and within 7 days, was performed. Statistical correlations between the development of CIN and creatinine level before CECT examination, patient location, type and amount of contrast agent, blood urea nitrogen-creatinine ratio, history of diabetes, hypercalcemia, Bence Jones proteinuria, ß(2)-microglobulin level, albumin level, International Myeloma Staging System stage, and history of myeloma provided at the time the CT examination was ordered were calculated. RESULTS: Forty-six patients who completed 80 unique examinations were included; their average creatinine level before CECT examination was 0.97 mg/dL. There was no significant difference in the average creatinine levels before CT examination between patients without and those with CIN. Four (5%) and 12 (15%) patients developed CIN within 48 hours and 7 days, respectively. Only serum ß(2)-microglobulin level showed a statistically significant (p = 0.03) correlation with the development of CIN. CONCLUSION: The incidence of CIN in patients with multiple myeloma with a normal creatinine level is low and correlates with ß(2)-microglobulin levels. The administration of contrast agent in this patient population is safe but should be based on the potential benefit of the examination and the expected low risk of developing CIN.

Current state of radiology report release in electronic patient portals.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study is to evaluate the current practice patterns of radiology report release into electronic patient portals. METHODS: A survey to assess details of radiology report release was distributed to members of The Association of Administrators in Academic Radiology across the United States. Numerical analysis was used to calculate the frequencies and percentages for the clinical site, frequency and pattern of patient portal use were calculated. Statistical analysis determined the percentages and frequencies for the clinical site, frequency and pattern of patient portal use, as well as statistical differences. RESULTS: A total of 31 (response rate = 28%, 31/108) at least partially completed surveys were received. Most (29/31, 94%) sites reported having a patient portal available with 80% (12/15) reporting < 50% patient utilization. There were no significant (p > 0.05) geographical differences noted in percentage utilization. Seventy-eight percent (21/27) of sites reported some form of automatic radiology report release into their portal. Mean delay was 4 days (range 0-7) from report completion to portal release. No correlation (r = 2) was seen between percentage of patient utilization of portals and timing of radiology report release. CONCLUSION: Most academic centers across the country have patient portals, however, most of these centers report less than 50% utilization of the portals by patients. While variability in radiology report release in patient portals was noted, the majority (78%) of academic medical centers have some form of automatic report release with average delay of 4 days between report completion to portal release.

Utility of Artificial Intelligence Tool as a Prospective Radiology Peer Reviewer - Detection of Unreported Intracranial Hemorrhage.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Misdiagnosis of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) can adversely impact patient outcomes. The increasing workload on the radiologists may increase the chance of error and compromise the quality of care provided by the radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used an FDA approved artificial intelligence (AI) solution based on a convolutional neural network to assess the prevalence of ICH in scans, which were reported as negative for ICH. We retrospectively applied the AI solution to all consecutive noncontrast computed tomography (CT) head scans performed at eight imaging sites affiliated to our institution. RESULTS: In the 6565 noncontrast CT head scans, which met the inclusion criteria, 5585 scans were reported to have no ICH ("negative-by-report" cases). We applied AI solution to these "negative-by-report" cases. AI solution suggested there were ICH in 28 of these scans ("negative-by-report" and "positive-by-AI solution"). After consensus review by three neuroradiologists, 16 of these scans were found to have ICH, which was not reported (missed diagnosis by radiologists), with a false-negative rate of radiologists for ICH detection at 1.6%. Most commonly missed ICH was overlying the cerebral convexity and in the parafalcine regions. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that an AI solution can help radiologists to diagnose ICH and thus decrease the error rate. AI solution can serve as a prospective peer review tool for non-contrast head CT scans to identify ICH and thus minimize false negatives.

Can a simplified CT response criteria for vascular involvement in pancreatic adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy predict survival in patients who achieved subsequent R0 resection?

PURPOSE: To investigate if a simplified image based scoring system assessing treatment response after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) can predict survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who achieved subsequent R0 resection. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 57 PDAC patients (male = 29, 51%) with mean age of 64 at diagnosis (range 42-79) who received NAT and R0 resection. Post-NAT overall, arterial and venous imaging response was characterized as improved, similar, or worse by 2 readers independently followed by consensus review. Kaplan-Meier Analysis was performed to compare overall survival (OS) with post-NAT overall imaging response. A Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to evaluate the association of the following variables with OS: overall, arterial and venous radiology response, clinical staging, postoperative CA19-9, and patient age. RESULTS: At study conclusion, 30/57 patients were deceased (53%), 26/57 (46%) alive, and 1 patient unknown. Post-NAT, 39/57 (68.4%) had overall improved disease and 18/57 (31.6%) had similar disease. The median OS was 55.7 months (95% CI 33.4-not reached, NR) for those with improved disease vs. 53.9 months (95% CI 14.3-NR) with similar disease (p = 0.859) after NAT. Among all clinical parameters, only post-operative CA 19-9 level was associated with OS (p = 0.002) and PFS (p = 0.005), respectively. CONCLUSION: Pancreatic cancer patients who underwent R0 resection showed no difference in survival when comparing those with similar vs improved disease on post-NAT imaging.

Adapting the modified barium swallow: modifications to improve safety in the setting of airborne respiratory illnesses like COVID-19.

No guidance exists on how to safely perform modified barium swallows (MBS) in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic or other communicable airborne respiratory infections (C-ARI). MBS has the potential to become an aerosol generating procedure (AGP) as it may trigger a cough or necessitate suctioning which may result in transmission of C-ARI putting patients and health care workers at risk. Regulations and best practices from international and US governmental and commercial agencies were reviewed. This review led to the multidisciplinary development of best practices of the safety measures and structural requirements to avoid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or other C-ARIs when performing MBS. Implementation of these best practices resulted in structural changes to the fluoroscopy suite and protocol workflows. This enabled patients with COVID-19 to undergo MBS while maintaining patient and staff safety including mitigation of potential risk of onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to other patients. With proper modifications, MBS can be safely performed on patients with C-ARI such as COVID-19 while maintaining patient and health care worker (HCW) safety.