A Diagnostic Dilemma: New Enhancing Suspicious Findings on Breast MRI Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the incidence and outcome of new enhancing findings on breast MRI after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS: This IRB-approved retrospective review included women with breast cancer undergoing MRI to evaluate NAC response at our institution from January 1, 1998 to March 3, 2021. Post-NAC MRIs given BI-RADS 4 or 5 with new enhancing findings were identified. Patients were excluded if they lacked pretreatment MRI or insufficient follow-up, or if the finding was a satellite of the primary tumor. Medical records and imaging studies were reviewed to identify patients and to find characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: Over the study period, 2880 post-NAC breast MRIs were performed. Of 128 post-NAC MRIs given BI-RADS 4 or 5 (4.4%), 35 new suspicious findings were found on 32 MRIs, incidence rate 1.1% (32/2880). Most were characterized as nonmass enhancement (17/35, 49%), followed by mass (11/35, 31%), and then focus (7/35, 20%), with an average maximum dimension of 1.3 cm (range 0.3-7.1 cm). New findings were ipsilateral to the index cancer in 20/35 (57%) of cases. Of the 35 suspicious findings, 22 underwent image-guided biopsy (62%), 1 was surgically excised (3%), 7 underwent mastectomy (20%), 5 were stable or resolved on follow-up (8%), and none were malignant. Thirty-three were benign (94%), and two were benign high-risk lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia, radial scar) (6%). CONCLUSION: New suspicious breast MRI findings after NAC are uncommon with a low likelihood of malignancy. Further study is warranted using multi-institutional data for this low incidence finding.

Ultrasound Screening for Transplant Renal Artery Stenosis Risk Stratification Using Standardized Criteria in Structured Reporting: A Validation Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of templated ultrasound reports using transplant renal artery stenosis (TRAS) risk stratification (RS), particularly with regard to utilization of downstream angiographic studies and angiographic presence of TRAS. METHODS: Ultrasounds with TRAS-RS templated reports from August 2017 to May 2020 were included. Studies were excluded if performed <28 days posttransplant and where TRAS was not clinically considered. A total of 530 ultrasounds met inclusion/exclusion criteria. TRAS-RS criteria were recorded (renal artery velocity ≥300 cm/s, spectral broadening in the renal artery, and intraparenchymal acceleration time ≥0.1 second). Depending on the number of criteria present, recipients were stratified into low (0/3), intermediate (1/3), high (2/3), and very high (3/3) risk for TRAS. Student's t-test was performed to identify whether the TRAS-RS category was associated with 1) performance of angiography to assess for TRAS and 2) angiographic presence of TRAS. RESULTS: Of the 530 ultrasounds, 74 (14%) underwent angiography. Of these, 41 (55%) were positive for TRAS (overall positive rate, 8%). Number of ultrasounds, angiograms, and angiograms positive for TRAS, respectively, in each of the TRAS-RS categories for the 530 cases were: low probability: n = 370 (70% of all studied reports), 7 angiograms (2%), and 0 (0%) positive for TRAS; intermediate: n = 87 (16%), 24 angiograms (28%), and 8 (33%) positive; high: n = 46 (9%), 23 angiograms (50%), and 14 (61%) positive; and very high: n = 27 (5%), 20 angiograms (74%), and 19 (95%) positive. TRAS-RS score was associated with subsequent performance of angiography and positive rate for TRAS (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Implementing a defined ultrasound screening tool with templated reporting for TRAS allowed for effective selection of those requiring an angiogram.

Cost and Morbidity Analysis of Chest Port Insertion: Interventional Radiology Suite Versus Operating Room.

PURPOSE: To compare complications and cost, from a hospital perspective, of chest port insertions performed in an interventional radiology (IR) suite versus in surgery in an operating room (OR). METHODS: This study was approved by an institutional review board and is HIPAA compliant. Medical records were retrospectively searched on consecutive chest port placement procedures, in the IR suite and the OR, between October 22, 2010 and February 26, 2013, to determine patients' demographic information and chest port-related complications and/or infections. A total of 478 charts were reviewed (age range: 21-85 years; 309 women, 169 men). Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors associated with an increased complication rate. Cost data on 149 consecutive Medicare outpatients (100 treated in the IR suite; 49 treated in the OR) who had isolated chest port insertions between March 2012 and February 2013 were obtained for both the operative services and pharmacy. Nonparametric tests for heterogeneity were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis method. RESULTS: Early complications occurred in 9.2% (22 of 239) of the IR patients versus 13.4% (32 of 239) of the OR patients. Of the 478 implanted chest ports, 9 placed in IR and 18 placed in surgery required early removal. Infections from the ports placed in IR versus the OR were 0.25 versus 0.18 infections per 1000 catheters, respectively. Overall mean costs for chest port insertion were significantly higher in the OR, for both room and pharmacy costs (P < .0001). Overall average cost to place chest ports in an OR setting was almost twice that of placement in the IR suite. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital costs to place a chest port were significantly lower in the IR suite than in the OR, whereas radiology and surgery patients did not show a significantly different rate of complications and/or infections.