Analysis of Low Appropriateness Score Exam Trends in Decision Support-based Radiology Order Entry System.

PURPOSE: Awareness of imaging utilization increased after implementation of Radiology Order Entry with decision support systems (ROE-DS). Our hypothesis is few exams with low Clinical Appropriateness Score (CAS) on ROE-DS are performed. Clinical indications of exams with CAS less than 3 (9-point scale) were re-reviewed and reports analyzed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Structured Query Language-based query retrieved exams with CAS less than 3 in ROE-DS from January 2007 to December 2011. Reasons provided by physicians for ordering these exams and reports of exams performed were analyzed. For each indication, number of exams ordered and performed was calculated. Statistical significance was assessed using Student's t test and χ2 analysis (P < .05). RESULTS: From 445,984 exams, 12,615 exams (2.8%) had CAS less than 3, and 7,956 exams (63%) were performed. Reasons for ordering of 12,615 low CAS exams were as follows: Requests by physician specialists without further explanation (4,516 = 35.8%), notation of special clinical circumstances (2,877 = 22.8%), requests by nonphysician staff without further explanation (1,383 = 10.9%), absence of suspected finding on previous modality (1,099 = 8.7%), patient preference (737 = 5.8%), and requests based on radiologists' recommendations (706 = 5.6%). Difference between male and female (male < female) preferences for low CAS exams was statistically significant (P < .01). Imaging outcome was highest for extremity MRI cases (66.7%; P < .01). CONCLUSION: Less than 3% of exams ordered had low CAS and about two-thirds of these were performed. Most common indication for ordering these exams was physician specialist request based on opinion of medical necessity without specification. Extremity MRI constituted the highest positive findings for low CAS exams performed.

Assessing renal parenchymal volume on unenhanced CT as a marker for predicting renal function in patients with chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate renal volume in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients using a semiautomated software and compare them with split renal function estimates from radionuclide renogram (RR). We proposed that renal volume from unenhanced computed tomography (CT) scans may serve as surrogate marker for assessing renal function in CKD patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Unenhanced multidetector CT scans of 26 patients with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/kg/body surface area [BSA]) and 10 controls (eGFR >60 mL/kg/BSA) were analyzed to calculate renal volumes using a semiautomated software (AMIRAV5.2.0). Volumes obtained were then correlated with corresponding eGFR and split renal function estimates from RR. Volumes were also compared with those obtained on enhanced scans in 10 cases (five disease group, five controls). Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess agreement between methods. RESULTS: A moderately positive correlation was found between renal volume obtained on unenhanced CT and eGFR (r = 0.65, P < .0001), whereas a significantly high correlation with split function estimates from RR (r = 0.95, P < .001) was found. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a good agreement between renal volume from CT and renal function from RR (34/36 observations were within 95% CI and there were two outliers). Correlation between volumes obtained from unenhanced and enhanced CT scans was also significant (r = 0.96). CONCLUSION: In patients with CKD, renal volume derived from unenhanced CT can possibly serve as a surrogate marker for assessing and monitoring renal function reserves to plan further management.

Natural orifice versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in a porcine model: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) research has primarily involved case series reports of low-risk procedures. Distal pancreatectomy has significant postoperative morbidity and would permit rigorous examination in a controlled trial setting. OBJECTIVE: To compare endoscopic transgastric distal pancreatectomy (ETDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Academic hospital. SUBJECTS: Forty-one swine, 28 block randomized. INTERVENTIONS: LDP was performed with 3 trocars and stapled transection of the pancreas. ETDP was performed via a gastrotomy, with 1 trocar for visualization, by using endoloop placement, snare transection, and purse-string gastrotomy closure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Clinical examination, CT, serum chemistries, necropsy, peritoneal fluid analysis, and histologic examination. RESULTS: Swine were survived for 8 days. The procedure time for ETDP was significantly greater than for LDP (1:52 vs 0:33 [hours:minutes]; P = .00). Pancreatic specimen weight was similar (4.1 g vs 5.5 g; P = .108). Postoperatively, 26 of 28 animals thrived. In the LDP group, 1 death caused by pancreatic leak and renal failure occurred on day 1. In the ETDP group, 1 death caused by pneumothorax occurred intraoperatively. The necropsy, CT, and histologic examinations revealed focal resection-margin necrosis in 3 to 7 swine in the ETDP group with no proximal necrosis or pancreatitis. The groups were equivalent clinically, by survival, and by serum and peritoneal fluid analysis. The gastrotomy closure was associated with small serosal adhesions, but no gross abscess or necrosis. LIMITATION: Animal study. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest controlled trial of NOTES orifice surgery to date, there was no clinical or survival difference between NOTES and laparoscopic approaches.