There are significant radiological differences between GSD and GLA, although there are some overlapping features. The major distinguishing characteristic is the progressive osteolysis seen in GSD. Findings suggestive of GLA are more extensive involvement, particularly of the appendicular skeleton, presence of discretemacrocystic lymphatic malformations and visceral organ lesions.

• Numerous techniques are required to provide optimal MR images in paediatric patients. • Radial free-breathing contrast-enhanced acquisition demonstrated excellent image quality. • Image quality and lesion conspicuity were better with radial than Cartesian acquisition. • More lesions were detected on contrast-enhanced radial than on Cartesian acquisition. • Radial GRE can be used for performing abdominopelvic MRI in paediatric patients.

T he accurate determination of a child's developmental status is required for proper treatment of various growth disorders (1) and scoliosis (2). Other parameters, such as height, weight, secondary sexual characteristics, chronologic age, and dental age, correlate with developmental status, but skeletal age has been considered the most reliable method (3-5). The standard of care for this assessment calls for radiologists to identify the reference standard in an atlas of hand radiographs that most closely resembles an anteroposterior or posteroanterior radiograph of the participant's left hand. The most common atlas used as a reference standard is the Radiographic Atlas of Skeletal Development of the Hand and Wrist, published in 1959 (6).As part of the process of implementing an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm in clinical practice, it is critical to properly determine its effects. However, different study designs may yield different findings about the same assistive technologies. For example, the same commercially available computer-aided detection system for detecting pulmonary nodules on chest CT scans produced different findings in studies completed within a year of each other (7-9). Findings on potential computer-aided diagnosis Background: Previous studies suggest that use of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms as diagnostic aids may improve the quality of skeletal age assessment, though these studies lack evidence from clinical practice.Purpose: To compare the accuracy and interpretation time of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations with and without the use of an AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. Materials and Methods:In this prospective randomized controlled trial, the accuracy of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations was performed with (n = 792) and without (n = 739) the AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. For examinations with the AI algorithm, the radiologist was shown the AI interpretation as part of their routine clinical work and was permitted to accept or modify it. Hand radiographs were interpreted by 93 radiologists from six centers. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean absolute difference between the skeletal age dictated into the radiologists' signed report and the average interpretation of a panel of four radiologists not using a diagnostic aid. The secondary outcome was the interpretation time. A linear mixed-effects regression model with random center-and radiologist-level effects was used to compare the two experimental groups.Results: Overall mean absolute difference was lower when radiologists used the AI algorithm compared with when they did not (5.36 months vs 5.95 months; P = .04). The proportions at which the absolute difference exceeded 12 months (9.3% vs 13.0%, P = .02) and 24 months (0.5% vs 1.8%, P = .02) were lower with the AI algorithm than without it. Median radiologist interpretation time was lower with the AI algorithm than without it (102 seconds vs 142 seconds, P = .001). Conclusion:Use of an artificial intelligence algorithm ...

Our study demonstrates that identification of select constellations of findings using abdominal sonography, in addition to focused US examination of the right lower quadrant, can improve sonographic diagnosis of perforated appendicitis in the pediatric population.

Rationale and Objectives: The need for social distancing has resulted in rapid restructuring of medical student education in radiology. While students traditionally spend time learning in the reading room, remote clinical learning requires material shared without direct teaching at the radiology workstation. Can remote clinical learning meet or exceed the educational value of the traditional in-person learning experience? Can student engagement be matched or exceeded in a remote learning environment? Materials and Methods: To replace the in-person reading room experience, a small-group learning session for medical students named Virtual Read-Out (VRO) was developed using teleconferencing software. After Institutional Review Board approval, two student groups were anonymously surveyed to assess differences in student engagement and perceived value between learning environments: "Conventional" students participating in the reading room (before the pandemic) and "Remote" students participating in VRO sessions. Students reported perceived frequency of a series of five-point Likert statements. Based on number of respondents, an independent t-test was performed to determine the significance of results between two groups. Results: Twenty-seven conventional and 41 remote students responded. Remote students reported modest but significantly higher frequency of active participation in reviewing radiology exams (p < 0.05). There was significantly lower frequency of reported boredom among Remote students (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in perceived educational value between the two groups. Conclusion: Students report a high degree of teaching quality, clinical relevance, and educational value regardless of remote or in-person learning format. Remote clinical radiology education can be achieved with equal or greater student interaction and perceived value in fewer contact hours than conventional learning in the reading room.

No abstract

Our purpose was to evaluate the interdisciplinary aspects of Project MAINSTREAM, a faculty development program that trained 39 competitively selected health professional tutors in substance abuse education. Mid-career faculty fellows (tutors) from 14 different health professions across the US dedicated 20% of their academic time for two years to Project MAINSTREAM. Teams of three fellows carried out curricular enhancement and service-learning field project requirements in mentored Interdisciplinary Faculty Learning Groups (IFLGs). Formative and summative evaluations were conducted via written questionnaires and confidential telephone interviews. The importance of interdisciplinary education was rated positively (mean of 3.57 on 1 - 5 scale). Using 18 parameters, fellows preferred interdisciplinary over single disciplinary teaching (means ranged from 3.40 - 4.86), and reported high levels of benefit from their interdisciplinary collaborations (means ranged from 3.53 - 4.56). Fellows reported that interdisciplinary educational collaborations were feasible (3.31) at their home institutions. The majority (63%) said that their trainees, colleagues, supervisors and institutions valued interdisciplinary training either "highly" or "somewhat", but 22% did not value it. The fellows identified scheduling conflicts (3.46), and lack of faculty rewards (3.46) such as pay or credit toward promotion, as two barriers that they encountered.

Rapidly enlarging, painful plexiform neurofibromas (PN) in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) patients are at higher risk for harboring a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST). Fludeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has been used to support more invasive diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. However, PET/CT imparts an untoward radiation hazard to this population with tumor suppressor gene impairment. The use of FDG PET coupled with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) rather than CT is a safer alternative but its relative diagnostic sensitivity requires verification. Ten patients (6 females, 4 males, mean age 27 years, range 8–54) with NF1 and progressive PN were accrued from our institutional NF Clinic. Indications for PET scanning included increasing pain and/or progressive disability associated with an enlarging PN on serial MRIs. Following a clinically indicated whole-body FDG PET/CT, a contemporaneous PET/MRI was obtained using residual FDG activity with an average time interval of 3–4 h FDG-avid lesions were assessed for both maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) from PET/CT and SUVmax from PET/MR and correlation was made between the two parameters. 26 FDG avid lesions were detected on both PET/CT and PET/MR with an accuracy of 100%. SUVmax values ranged from 1.4–10.8 for PET/CT and from 0.2-5.9 for PET/MRI. SUVmax values from both modalities demonstrated positive correlation (r = 0.45, P < 0.001). PET/MRI radiation dose was significantly lower (53.35% ± 14.37% [P = 0.006]). In conclusion, PET/MRI is a feasible alternative to PET/CT in patients with NF1 when screening for the potential occurrence of MPNST. Reduction in radiation exposure approaches 50% compared to PET/CT.