Can Supine Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging After a Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Provide Information for Supine Procedures?

METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 75 lesions in 50 patients with pathologically proven breast cancer who underwent MRI in prone and supine positions between December 2019 and December 2020. The transverse, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal dimensions (in millimeters) of the tumor in the x -, y -, and z -axes were measured. Distances from the center of the tumor to the chest wall and the adjacent skin were measured on transverse and reformatted sagittal images. In cases where multifocal lesions were present, the transverse, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal distances between the tumor centers in the x -, y -, and z -axes were measured. Differences between measurements in supine and prone MRI were evaluated with the Mann-Whitney U and the Wilcoxon tests. P values of less than 0.05 were considered to indicate a statistically significant difference. RESULTS: The analysis revealed 31 MRIs with 1 and 20 with multifocal lesions. The x -axis dimension of the lesions in prone and supine positions did not significantly differ ( P = 0.198) between the 2 positions. A significant difference in the y - and z -axes dimensions was observed between the prone and supine position ( P = 0.00 for both). The distance from the tumor to the chest wall and the adjacent skin showed significant difference ( P = 0.00 for both). For multifocal lesions, the distance between the lesions showed a significant difference on the y -axis ( P = 0.00). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a significant difference in the tumor size, location, and tumor-to-tumor distances due to change of patient position, from the standard prone MRI to the supine position in the operating room, resulting in distortion, spatial repositioning, and convergence of the lesions. Supine MRI may be considered in providing a less extensive surgery.

The role of CT in decision for acute appendicitis treatment.

PURPOSE Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of the acute abdomen requiring surgery. Although standard treatment has been surgery, it has been seen in recent years that treatment is possible with antibiotics and non-operative observation. In this study, our aim is to determine whether the CT findings in patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis can be used for directing treatment. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on 138 patients with acute appendicitis who underwent CT between 2015 - 2019. In this study, medical treatment group (n = 60) versus surgical treatment group (n = 78) and successful antibiotic treatment group (n = 23) versus unsuccessful antibiotic treatment group (n = 14) were compared. Appendiceal wall thickness, appendiceal diameter, the severity of mural enhancement, intra-abdominal free fluid, the severity of periappendiceal fat stranding, size of pericecal lymph node, appendicolith, adjacent organ findings and the CT appendicitis score of groups were compared with Pearson Chi-square and Mann Whitney U tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of surgical treatment, expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Diagnostic efficacies of appendiceal diameter, the CT appendicitis score and developed model were quantified by ROC curves. RESULTS Appendiceal diameter (P < .001), adjacent organ findings (P = .041), the CT appendicitis score (P < .001), the severity of periappendiceal fat stranding (P = .002), appendicolith (P = .001) and intra-abdominal free fluid (P <0.001) showed statistically significant differences between the medical and surgical treatment groups. According to the logistic regression test, if the patients with appendiceal diameter ≥13mm (OR = 5.1, 95%CI 1.58 - 16.50), appendicolith (OR = 4, 95%CI 1.17 - 13.63) and intra-abdominal free fluid (OR = 3.04, 95%CI 1.28 - 7.20), surgeons should prefer surgical treatment. The AUCs for the CT appendicitis score, the appendiceal diameter and the model were 0.742 (95% CI 0,659 - 0,824), 0.699 (95% CI 0.613 - 0.786) and 0.745 (95% CI 0.671 - 0.819), respectively. As the successful and unsuccessful medical treatment groups were compared, the only significant parameter was the severity of mural enhancement (P = .005). CONCLUSION CT findings may be helpful in patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis whose treatment surgeons are indecisive about. We can recommend surgical treatment in cases with appendix diameter ≥13mm, intraabdominal free fluid, appendicolith, high CT appendicitis score and severe mural enhancement.