Accuracy and reading time for six strategies using digital breast tomosynthesis in women with mammographically negative dense breasts.

OBJECTIVE: To compare six strategies using digital breast tomosynthesis in women with mammographically negative dense breasts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a substudy of the 'ASTOUND' trial. 163 women who underwent tomosynthesis with synthetically reconstructed projection images (S-2D) inclusive of 13 (7.9%) cases diagnosed with breast cancer at histopathology after surgery were evaluated. Accuracy measures and screen-reading time of six reading strategies were assessed: (A) Single reading of S-2D alone, (B) single reading of tomosynthesis alone, (C) single reading of joint interpretation of tomosynthesis + S-2D, (D) double-reading of S-2D alone, (E) double reading of tomosynthesis alone, (F) double reading of joint interpretation of tomosynthesis + S-2D. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 53 years (range, 36-88 years). The highest global accuracy was obtained with double reading of tomosynthesis + S2D (F) with an AUC of 0.979 (p<0.001) and a mean reading time of 154 s versus 34 s for the fastest strategy (single reading of S-2D alone). The AUCs for the other five strategies did not differ from each other. CONCLUSION: Double reading of tomosynthesis+ S2D had the best accuracy of six screen-reading strategies although it had the longest reading time. KEY POINTS: • Tomosynthesis acquisitions are progressively implemented with reconstructed synthesized 2D images • Double reading using S-2D plus tomosynthesis had the highest global accuracy (p<0.001). • Double reading of S-2D plus tomosynthesis increased reading time.

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance angiography for detection of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To review the diagnostic performance of MR coronary angiography (MRCA) for coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched on MEDLINE/EMBASE with the following inclusion criteria: 01/01/2000-03/23/2015 publication date; per-patient sensitivity/specificity for >50 % stenosis confirmed by conventional coronary angiography with raw data provided or retrievable; sample size >10. Quality was appraised using QUADAS2. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighteen studies were retrieved, 24 of them, including 1,638 patients, were selected. Using a bivariate model, the pooled sensitivity was 89 % (95 % confidence interval 86-92 %), the pooled specificity 72 % (63-79 %). Meta-regression did not show a significant impact on sensitivity/specificity for both year of publication and disease prevalence (p ≥ 0.114). Sensitivity of contrast-enhanced examinations (95 %, 90-97 %) was higher (p = 0.005) than that of unenhanced examinations (87 %, 83-90 %). Specificity of whole-heart acquisition mode (78 %, 72-84 %) was higher (p = 0.006) than that of targeted mode (57 %, 45-69 %). Specificity at 3 T (83 %, 69-92 %) was higher (p = 0.067) than that at 1.5 T (68 %, 60-76 %). Risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability were low. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity and specificity of MRCA for CAD were 89 % and 72 %, respectively. A specificity higher than 80 % may be obtained at 3 T. Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols should be preferred for a higher diagnostic performance. KEY POINTS: • MRCA sensitivity and specificity for CAD are below those of CTA. • Contrast administration increased sensitivity to 95 % (90-97 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Whole-heart mode increased specificity to 78 % (72-84 %), comparable with that of CTA. • Specificity at 3 T was borderline-significantly higher (p = 0.067) than at 1.5 T. • Whole-heart contrast-enhanced protocols are the best approach for MRCA.

Reliability of side-to-side ultrasound cross-sectional area measurements of lower extremity nerves in healthy subjects.

INTRODUCTION: In peripheral nerve ultrasound, the healthy contralateral side may be used as internal control. Therefore, inherent side-to-side differences must be minimal. The goal of this study was to assess intrastudy, intraobserver, and interobserver reproducibility of ultrasound in comparative side-to-side evaluation of lower limb nerves. METHODS: Lower limb nerves of 60 normal subjects were evaluated by 3 radiologists. Bilateral sciatic, tibial, common fibular, sural, lateral femoral cutaneous, femoral, obturator, and saphenous nerves were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, side-to-side differences were not statistically significant at any level. In the lower limb nerves, in a between-limb comparison, the minimum detectable difference of cross-sectional area ranged from 16.4 mm(2) (sciatic nerve at the level of piriformis muscle) to 0.4 mm(2) (saphenous nerve). CONCLUSION: In general, the healthy contralateral side can be used as an internal control.

Nerves of the hand beyond the carpal tunnel.

Imaging studies including ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging may be required to evaluate the median nerve in patients with suspected carpal tunnel syndrome. However, the radial and ulnar nerves contribute to sensory and motor innervations to the hand as well. Compressive, traumatic, and iatrogenic events may damage the small terminal branches of these nerves. In the hand, US is able to identify injuries of the median, ulnar, radial nerve, and terminal branches. This article presents the role of imaging to evaluate the nerves of the hand with an emphasis on US. Due to its high-resolution capabilities, US is useful to determine the location, extent, and type of nerve lesion. Moreover, US is useful for a postsurgical assessment. The anterior interosseous nerve, Guyon's tunnel syndrome, and Wartenberg's syndrome are also described.