Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Pancreas ; 51(9): 1225-1230, 2022 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37078949

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines recommend magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for risk stratification of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). We assessed the interobserver agreement among radiologists in evaluating and risk stratifying IPMNs. METHODS: This single-center study evaluated 30 patients with IPMNs who had undergone MRI/MRCP, endoscopic ultrasound, and/or surgical resection. Six abdominal radiologists evaluated the MRI/MRCPs to document multiple parameters. The analysis applied Landis and Koch κ interpretation for categorical variables and intraclass correlation coefficient (r) for continuous variables. RESULTS: Radiologists demonstrated almost perfect agreement for location (κ = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.87), size (r = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98), and main pancreatic duct diameter (r = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99). Substantial agreement was observed for communication with the main pancreatic duct (κ = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.75) and classification of IPMN subtype (κ = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.86). Presence of intracystic nodules (κ = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21-0.42) and wall thickening (κ = 0.09; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.18) reached only fair and slight agreement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI/MRCP is excellent in the evaluation of spatial aspects, there is lower reliability for nondimensional characteristics of IPMNs. These data support guideline-recommended complementary evaluation of IPMNs with MRI/MRCP and endoscopic ultrasound.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal , Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Cholangiopancreatography, Magnetic Resonance/methods , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/pathology , Retrospective Studies
2.
Radiol Clin North Am ; 58(6): 1019-1031, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33040845

ABSTRACT

Radiologists very frequently encounter incidental findings related to the thyroid gland. Given increases in imaging use over the past several decades, thyroid incidentalomas are increasingly encountered in clinical practice, and it is important for radiologists to be aware of recent developments with respect to workup and diagnosis of incidental thyroid abnormalities. Recent reporting and management guidelines, such as those from the American College of Radiology and American Thyroid Association, are reviewed along with applicable evidence in the literature. Trending topics, such as artificial intelligence approaches to guide thyroid incidentaloma workup, are also discussed.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence/statistics & numerical data , Clinical Decision-Making , Diagnostic Imaging/methods , Incidental Findings , Thyroid Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Thyroid Nodule/diagnostic imaging , Biopsy, Needle , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Incidence , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Male , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Radiologists/statistics & numerical data , Thyroid Neoplasms/epidemiology , Thyroid Neoplasms/pathology , Thyroid Nodule/epidemiology , Thyroid Nodule/pathology , Ultrasonography, Doppler/methods , United States/epidemiology
3.
Abdom Radiol (NY) ; 42(9): 2243-2250, 2017 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28393301

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare the content and accuracy of structured reporting (SR) versus non-structured reporting (NSR) for computed tomographic enterography (CTE) of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant, retrospective study included 30 adult subjects (15 male, 15 female; mean age 41.9 years) with IBD imaged with CTE. Nine radiologists (3 faculty, 3 abdominal imaging fellows, and 3 senior radiology residents) independently interpreted all examinations using both NSR and SR, separated by four weeks. Reports were assessed for documentation of 15 key reporting features and a subset of 5 features was assessed for accuracy. Thirty faculty reports (15 NSR [5 per reader] and 15 SR [5 per reader]) were randomly selected for review by three referring physicians, who independently rated quality metrics for each report. RESULTS: NSR documented the presence or absence of 8.2 ± 2.2 key features, while SR documented 14.6 ± 0.5 features (p < 0.001). SR resulted in increased documentation of 13 of 15 features including stricture (p < 0.001), fistula (p < 0.001), fluid collection (p = 0.003), and perianal disease (p < 0.001). Among a subset of five features, accuracy for diagnosing multifocal disease was minimally increased when using SR (76% NSR vs. 83% SR; p = 0.01), but accuracy for other features was not affected by report type. Referring physicians significantly preferred SR based on ease of information extraction (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Structured reporting of CTE for IBD improved documentation of key reporting features for trainees and faculty, though there was minimal impact on accuracy. Referring physicians subjectively preferred the structured reports.


Subject(s)
Documentation/standards , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Aged , Clinical Competence , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL