Application of Lung-Screening Reporting and Data System Versus Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer Nodule Risk Calculation in the Alberta Lung Cancer Screening Study.

BACKGROUND: False-positive scans and resultant needless early recalls can increase harms and reduce cost-effectiveness of low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening. How LDCT scans are interpreted and classified may impact these metrics. METHODS: The Pan-Canadian Early Detection of Lung Cancer risk calculator was used to determine nodule risk of malignancy on baseline screening LDCTs in the Alberta Lung Cancer Screening Study, which were then classified according to Nodule Risk Classification (NRC) categories and ACR Lung Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS). Test performance characteristics and early recall rates were compared for each approach. RESULTS: In all, 775 baseline screens were analyzed. After a mean of 763 days (±203) of follow-up, lung cancer was detected in 22 participants (2.8%). No statistically significant differences in sensitivity, specificity, or area under the receiver operator characteristic curve occurred between the NRC and Lung-RADS nodule management approaches. Early recall rates were 9.2% and 9.3% for NRC and Lung-RADS, with the NRC unnecessarily recalling some ground glass nodules, and the Lung-RADS recalling many smaller solid nodules with low risk of malignancy. CONCLUSION: Performances of both the NRC and Lung-RADS in this cohort were very good with a trend to higher sensitivity for the NRC. Early recall rates were less than 10% with each approach, significantly lower than rates using the National Lung Screening Trial cutoffs. Further reductions in early recall rates without compromising sensitivity could be achieved by increasing the NRC threshold to 20% for ground glass nodules or by applying the nodule risk calculator with a 5% threshold to 6- to 10-mm solid nodules under Lung-RADS.

Patency of femoral tunneled hemodialysis catheters and factors predictive of patency failure.

PURPOSE: To determine the patency rates of and factors associated with increased risk of patency failure in patients with femoral vein tunneled hemodialysis catheters. METHODS: All femoral tunneled catheter insertions from 1996 to 2006 were reviewed, during which time 123 catheters were inserted. Of these, 66 were exchanges. Patients with femoral catheter failure versus those with femoral catheter patency were compared. Confounding factors, such as demographic and procedural factors, were incorporated and assessed using univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. RESULTS: Mean catheter primary patency failure time was 96.3 days (SE 17.9 days). Primary patency at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days was 53.8%, 45.4%, 32.1%, and 27.1% respectively. Crude rates of risk of catheter failure did not suggest a benefit for patients receiving catheters introduced from one side versus the other, but more cephalad location of catheter tip was associated with improved patency. Multivariate analysis showed that patients whose catheters were on the left side (p = 0.009), were of increasing age at the time of insertion (p = 0.002) and that those who had diabetes (p = 0.001) were at significantly greater risk of catheter failure. The catheter infection rate was 1.4/1000 catheter days. CONCLUSION: Patients who were of a more advanced age and had diabetes were at greater risk of femoral catheter failure, whereas those who received femoral catheters from the right side were less at risk of catheter failure.