Background
We aimed to test the hypothesis that 3-D volume-based scoring of computed tomographic (CT) images of the paranasal sinuses was superior to Lund-Mackay CT scoring of disease severity in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). We determined correlation between changes in CT scores (using each scoring system) with changes in other measures of disease severity (symptoms, endoscopic scoring, and quality of life) in patients with CRS treated with triamcinolone.
Methods
The study group comprised 48 adult subjects with CRS. Baseline symptoms and quality of life were assessed. Endoscopy and CT scans were performed. Patients received a single systemic dose of intramuscular triamcinolone and were reevaluated 1 month later. Strengths of the correlations between changes in CT scores and changes in CRS signs and symptoms and quality of life were determined.
Results
We observed some variability in degree of improvement for the different symptom, endoscopic, and quality-of-life parameters after treatment. Improvement of parameters was significantly correlated with improvement in CT disease score using both CT scoring methods. However, volumetric CT scoring had greater correlation with these parameters than Lund-Mackay scoring.
Conclusion
Volumetric scoring exhibited higher degree of correlation than Lund-Mackay scoring when comparing improvement in CT score with improvement in score for symptoms, endoscopic exam, and quality of life in this group of patients who received beneficial medical treatment for CRS.
Context
Little information exists concerning the frequency of clinically significant incidental findings (IFs) identified in the course of imaging research across a broad spectrum of imaging modalities and body regions.
Objective
To estimate the frequency with which research imaging IFs generate further clinical action, and the medical benefit/burden of identifying these IFs.
Design, Setting, and Participants
Retrospective review of subjects undergoing a research imaging exam that was interpreted by a radiologist for IFs in the first quarter of 2004, with 3-year clinical follow-up. An expert panel reviewed IFs generating clinical action to determine medical benefit/burden based on predefined criteria.
Main Outcome Measures
Frequency of (1) IFs that generated further clinical action by modality, body part, age, gender, and (2) IFs resulting in clear medical benefit or burden.
Results
1376 patients underwent 1426 research imaging studies. 40% (567/1426) of exams had at least one IF (1055 total). Risk of an IF increased significantly by age (OR=1.5; [1.4–1.7=95% C.I.] per decade increase). Abdominopelvic CT generated more IFs than other exams (OR=18.9 compared with ultrasound; 9.2% with subsequent clinical action), with CT Thorax and MR brain next (OR=11.9 and 5.9; 2.8% and 2.2% with action, respectively). Overall 6.2% of exams (35/567) with an IF generated clinical action, resulting in clear medical benefit in 1.1% (6/567) and clear medical burden in 0.5% (3/567). In most instances, medical benefit/burden was unclear (4.6%; 26/567).
Conclusions
The frequency of IFs in imaging research exams varies significantly by imaging modality, body region and age. Research imaging studies at high risk for generating IFs can be identified. Routine evaluation of research images by radiologists may result in identification of IFs in a substantial number of cases and subsequent clinical action to address them in much smaller number. Such clinical action can result in medical benefit to a small number of patients.
Musculoskeletal pain is more common among healthcare workers who participate in interventional procedures and is highest in nonphysician employees. The diagnosis of cancer in employees who participate in procedures that utilize radiation was not elevated when compared to controls within the same departments, although any conclusion regarding causality is limited by the cross-sectional nature of the study, as well as the low overall prevalence of malignancy in our study group.
J ust over ten years ago, the first human trials of virtual colonoscopy, or computed tomography (CT) colonography, were performed. 1 CT colonography (CTC), as it is now called, is a low radiation dose CT examination of the abdomen and pelvis following bowel purgation cleansing and insuflation (inflation) of the colon and rectum. High spatial resolution CT datasets of the abdomen and pelvis are obtained while the patient is lying in the prone and supine positions, with the entire procedure lasting about ten minutes. The resulting images are interactively reviewed on a dedicated computer workstation using 2D multiplanar images and 3D endoluminal displays of the colon. Over the past decade, rapid technological advancements in image acquisition, 3D display techniques, colonic insuflation, and stool tagging (i.e., labeling of stool with ingested radio-opaque contrast) have occurred, which have greatly improved the ability of CT colonography to detect colorectal polyps and cancer.Probably due to physician-researchers conducting early CT colonography research, the importance of incidental findings (IFs) discovered during CT colonography was quickly recognized. Several early studies suggested that the incidence of extracolonic findings that require further medical investigation or medical/ operative treatment was 10-11 percent and surpassed the incidence of large colorectal polyps in asymptomatic research subjects undergoing CT colonography. 2
Evidence before this study: Acute appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency in children. Its diagnosis remains challenging and children presenting with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain may be admitted for clinical observation or undergo normal appendicectomy (removal of a histologically normal appendix). A search for external validation studies of risk prediction models for acute appendicitis in children was performed on MEDLINE and Web of Science on 12 January 2017 using the search terms ["appendicitis" OR "appendectomy" OR "appendicectomy"] AND ["score" OR "model" OR "nomogram" OR "scoring"]. Studies validating prediction models aimed at differentiating acute appendicitis from all other causes of RIF pain were included. No date restrictions were applied. Validation studies were most commonly performed for the Alvarado, Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score (AIRS), and Paediatric Appendicitis Score (PAS) models. Most validation studies were based on retrospective, single centre, or small cohorts, and findings regarding model performance were inconsistent. There was no high quality evidence to guide selection of the optimum model and threshold cutoff for identification of low-risk children in the UK and Ireland. Added value of this study: Most children admitted to hospital with RIF pain do not undergo surgery. When children do undergo appendicectomy, removal of a normal appendix (normal appendicectomy) is common, occurring in around 1 in 6 children. The Shera score is able to identify a large low-risk group of children who present with acute RIF pain but do not have acute appendicitis (specificity 44%). This low-risk group has an overall 1 in 30 risk of acute appendicitis and a 1 in 270 risk of perforated appendicitis. The Shera score is unable to achieve a sufficiently high positive predictive value to select a high-risk group who should proceed directly to surgery. Current diagnostic performance of ultrasound is also too poor to select children for surgery. Implications of all the available evidence: Routine pre-operative risk scoring could inform shared decision making by doctors, children, and parents by supporting safe selection of lowrisk patients for ambulatory management, reducing unnecessary admissions and normal appendicectomy. Hospitals should ensure seven-day-a-week availability of ultrasound for medium and high-risk patients. Ultrasound should be performed by operators trained to assess for acute appendicitis in children. For children in whom diagnostic uncertainty remains following ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or low-dose computed tomography (CT) are second-line investigations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.