No abstract

BackgroundElectronic medical records and electronic data capture (EDC) have changed data collection in clinical and translational research. However, spreadsheet programs, such as Microsoft Excel, are still used as data repository to record and organize patient data for research.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the efficiency of EDC as against a standard spreadsheet in regards to time to collect data and data accuracy, measured in number of errors after adjudication.MethodsThis was a crossover study comparing the time to collect data in minutes between EDC and a spreadsheet. The EDC tool used was Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), whereas the spreadsheet was Microsoft Excel. The data collected was part of a registry of patients who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography in the emergency setting. Two data collectors with the same experience went over the same patients and collected relevant data on a case report form identical to the one used in our Emergency Department (ED) registry. Data collection tool was switched after the patient that represented half the cohort. For this, the patient cohort was exactly 30 days of our ED coronary Computed Tomography Angiography registry and the point of crossover was determined beforehand to be 15 days. We measured the number of patients admitted, and time to collect data. Accuracy was defined as absence of blank fields and errors, and was assessed by comparing data between data collectors and counting every time the data differed. Statistical analysis was made using paired t -test.ResultsThe study included 61 patients (122 observations) and 55 variables. The crossover occurred after the 30th patient. Mean time to collect data using EDC in minutes was 6.2±2.3, whereas using Excel was 8.0±2.0 (P <.001), a difference of 1.8 minutes between both means (22%). The cohort was evenly distributed with 3 admissions in the first half of the crossover and 4 in the second half. We saw 2 (<0.1%) continuous variable typos in the spreadsheet that a single data collector made. There were no blank fields. The data collection tools showed no differences in accuracy of data on comparison.ConclusionsData collection for our registry with an EDC tool was faster than using a spreadsheet, which in turn allowed more efficient follow-up of cases.

M agnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a widely used diagnostic tool for breast imaging in daily practice, with its high sensitivity to detect primary, recurrent, and residual breast cancer. Breast MRI serves as a reliable problem-solving tool in case of inconclusive mammography and ultrasonography (US) findings. It can be used to monitor the results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and it may also contribute to preoperative evaluation of known lesions. With increasing use of MRI, number of breast lesions visible only on MRI and need for MRI-guided breast biopsy have increased (1). Second-look US can also be used for re-evaluation of these lesions; because US-guided biopsy is an easier, cheaper, and faster method if these lesions are visible on second-look US. According to a recently published meta-analysis, lesion detection rates with second-look US are variable in the literature (22.6%-82.1%). Mass lesions and malignant lesions were more likely to be detected at second-look US; average detection rates were 66% for masses, 29% for non-mass-like enhancement (NME) (2, 3). However, focal or NME lesions, which are less detectable than masses on second-look US, require MRI-guided biopsy in the majority of cases. According to the MRI-guided biopsy series in the literature, approximately 25%-35% of these lesions are diagnosed as malignant (4-9).Within this context, the aim of the present study is to assess the effectiveness of MRI-guided 10 Gauge (G) vacuum-assisted breast biopsies (VABB) performed at our institution and to examine the relationship between lesion characteristics and histopathologic results. B R E A S T I MAG I N G O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E PURPOSEWe aimed to assess the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB), evaluate and compare the characteristics and histopathologic findings of lesions, and overview the follow-up results of benign lesions. METHODSMRI findings and histopathologic results of breast lesions biopsied by MRI-guided VABB between 2013 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. MRI findings closely related with malignancy were investigated in particular. Follow-up results of benign lesions were evaluated. RESULTSMRI-guided VABB was applied to 116 lesions of 112 women. Of the lesions, 75 (65%) were benign, while 41 (35%) were malignant. Segmental (94%), clustered (89%), and clustered ring (67%) nonmass-like enhancement patterns were found to be more related with malignancy. False-negative rate of MRI-guided VABB was 12%, underestimation rate was 21%. One of the 54 followed-up benign lesions had a malignant result. CONCLUSION MRI-guided VABB is a reliable method for the diagnosis of breast lesions that are positive only on MRI. Follow-up results show that cancer detection rate is low for radio-pathologically concordant lesions. Further multicenter studies with larger patient population are needed to elucidate these results.You may cite this article as: Taşkın F, Soyder A, Tanyeri A, Öztürk VS, Ünsal A. Lesion characteristics, histopathologic r...

Objectives To evaluate the efficiency and safety of emergency department (ED) coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) during a 3-year clinical experience. Methods Single-center registry of coronary CTA in consecutive ED patients with suspicion of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The primary outcome was efficiency of coronary CTA defined as the length of hospitalization. Secondary endpoints of safety were defined as the rate of downstream testing, normalcy rates of invasive coronary angiography (ICA), absence of missed ACS, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during follow-up, and index radiation exposure. Results 1022 consecutive patients were referred for clinical coronary CTA with suspicion of ACS. Overall, median time to discharge home was 10.5 (5.7–24.1) hours. Patient disposition was 42.7% direct discharge from the ED, 43.2% discharge from emergency unit, and 14.1% hospital admission. ACS rate during index hospitalization was 9.1%. 192 patients underwent additional diagnostic imaging and 77 underwent ICA. The positive predictive value of CTA compared to ICA was 78.9% (95%-CI 68.1–87.5%). Median CT radiation exposure was 4.0 (2.5–5.8) mSv. No ACS was missed; MACE at follow-up after negative CTA was 0.2%. Conclusions Coronary CTA in an experienced tertiary care setting allows for efficient and safe management of patients with suspicion for ACS.