Potential risk assessment: a model for quality evaluation in fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures.

This study presented a model applied for potential risk assessment in an interventional radiology setting. The model of potential risk assessment (MARP) consisted of the creation of a scale of indicators ranging from 0 to 5. The radiation levels were categorized according to gender, kind of procedure, value of kerma air product (Pka), and accumulated radiation dose (mGy). The MARP model was applied in 121 institutions over 8 y. A total of 201 656 patient radiation doses (Dose-area product and accumulated kerma) data were launched into the system over time, with an average of 22 406 doses per year. In the context of the workers (cardiologists, radiographers, and nurses) monitored during the MARP application, 8007 cases (with an average of 890 per year) of occupational radiation doses were recorded. This study showed a strategy for quality evaluation in fluoroscopy using a model with a compulsory information system for monitoring safety.

Radiología intervencionista en pediatría: no es un juego de niños / Pediatric interventional radiology: It's not a child's play

La radiología intervencionista pediátrica es una subespecialidad dinámica y en crecimiento. Las nuevas vías de formación en radiología intervencionista, el mantenimiento de las competencias con un pequeño volumen de casos o procedimientos complejos, la disponibilidad limitada de equipos y material pediátrico específico, los efectos de la sedación o de la anestesia sobre el neurodesarrollo y la protección radiológica suponen importantes retos y oportunidades.(AU)

Pediatric interventional radiology is a dynamic and growing subspecialty. The new training pathways in interventional radiology, the maintenance of skills with a small volume of cases or complex procedures, the limited availability of specific pediatric equipment and materials, the effects of sedation or anesthesia on neurodevelopment or radiological on neurodevelopment or radiation protection pose significant challenges and opportunities.(AU)

Development and Validation of an Electronic Adverse Event Model for Patient Safety Surveillance in Interventional Radiology.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive adverse event (AE) surveillance programs in interventional radiology (IR) are rare. Our aim was to develop and validate a retrospective electronic surveillance model to identify outpatient IR procedures that are likely to have an AE, to support patient safety and quality improvement. METHODS: We identified outpatient IR procedures performed in the period from October 2017 to September 2019 from the Veterans Health Administration (n = 135,283) and applied electronic triggers based on posyprocedure care to flag cases with a potential AE. From the trigger-flagged cases, we randomly sampled n = 1,500 for chart review to identify AEs. We also randomly sampled n = 600 from the unflagged cases. Chart-reviewed cases were merged with patient, procedure, and facility factors to estimate a mixed-effects logistic regression model designed to predict whether an AE occurred. Using model fit and criterion validity, we determined the best predicted probability threshold to identify cases with a likely AE. We reviewed a random sample of 200 cases above the threshold and 100 cases from below the threshold from October 2019 to March 2020 (n = 20,849) for model validation. RESULTS: In our development sample of mostly trigger-flagged cases, 444 of 2,096 cases (21.8%) had an AE. The optimal predicted probability threshold for a likely AE from our surveillance model was >50%, with positive predictive value of 68.9%, sensitivity of 38.3%, and specificity of 95.3%. In validation, chart-reviewed cases with AE probability >50% had a positive predictive value of 63% (n = 203). For the period from October 2017 to March 2020, the model identified approximately 70 IR cases per month that were likely to have an AE. CONCLUSIONS: This electronic trigger-based approach to AE surveillance could be used for patient-safety reporting and quality review.

Current Interventional Radiology-Related Benchmarked Clinical Quality Measures Are Less Likely to be "Capped" Than Diagnostic Radiology Clinical Quality Measures.

In the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS), quality measures are considered topped out if national median performance rates are ≥95%. Quality measures worth 10 points can be capped at 7 points if topped out for ≥2 years. This report compares the availability of diagnostic radiology (DR)-related and interventional radiology (IR)-related measures worth 10 points. A total of 196 MIPS clinical quality measures were reviewed on the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services MIPS website. There are significantly more IR-related measures worth 10 points than DR measures (2/9 DR measures vs 9/12 IR measures; P = .03), demonstrating that clinical IR services can help mixed IR/DR groups maximize their Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services payment adjustment.

Qualitative interviews and supporting evidence to identify the positive impacts of multidisciplinary vascular access teams.

BACKGROUND: Vascular access by means of intravenous catheters is essential for the safe, effective and cost-efficient delivery of intravenous fluids, antibiotics, nutrition and chemotherapy, but the use of these devices is not without complications. PURPOSE: A faculty of multidisciplinary European vascular access team (VAT) Leads/Members and experts sought to reframe how the implementation of a VAT could have positive impacts on patients and hospitals. METHODS: Interview data from a Faculty of nine VAT Leads/Members and experts from six European countries on the impact of multidisciplinary VATs in modern healthcare were assessed. A literature search was conducted that included Medline®-cited peer-reviewed articles published in the past 10 years in order to identify impact data and post-implementation of a multidisciplinary VAT that support the benefits to patient safety and satisfaction and to hospital efficiencies reported in the interview program. RESULTS: While VATs vary in structure and function, clarity of purpose and supportive training and education are key. Barriers to the implementation of VATs show commonality across countries, such as lack of investment, insufficient training and lack of awareness. Proven markers of VAT success include rapid referrals, improved patient outcomes and improved organizational efficiency. Standardization of outcomes data capture, processing and reporting are key to monitoring performance against baseline. Awareness of the cost of complications arising from inappropriate choice and placement, and poor care and maintenance, of the vascular access device must be raised. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of VATs can positively impact patient safety and satisfaction, improve organizational efficiencies and cost-effectiveness, and could create new opportunities for in- and outpatient services, beneficial to both patients and institutions.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Peri-operative Anticoagulation Management During Interventional Radiology Procedures.

This CIRSE Standards of Practice document is aimed at interventional radiologists and provides best practices for peri-operative anticoagulation management during interventional radiology procedures.

Interventional Radiology for Local Immunotherapy in Oncology.

Human intratumoral immunotherapy (HIT-IT) is under rapid development, with promising preliminary results and high expectations for current phase III trials. While outcomes remain paramount for patients and the referring oncologists, the technical aspects of drug injection are critical to the interventional radiologist to ensure optimal and reproducible outcomes. The technical considerations for HIT-IT affect the safety, efficacy, and further development of this treatment option. Image-guided access to the tumor allows the therapeutic index of a treatment to be enhanced by increasing the intratumoral drug concentration while minimizing its systemic exposure and associated on-target off-tumor adverse events. Direct access to the tumor also enables the acquisition of cancer tissue for sequential sampling to better understand the pharmacodynamics of the injected immunotherapy and its efficacy through correlation of immune responses, pathologic responses, and imaging tumor response. The aim of this article is to share the technical insights of HIT-IT, with particular consideration for patient selection, lesion assessment, image guidance, and technical injection options. In addition, the organization of a standard patient workflow is discussed, so as to optimize HIT-IT outcome and the patient experience.

Interventional Radiology Outpatient Clinics (IROC): Clinical Impact and Patient Satisfaction.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively analyze our interventional radiology outpatient clinics (IROC) for referral patterns, impact on interventional practice, and patient satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consultations performed between 2011 and 2019 were extracted. The two consecutive years with the highest number of consultations (n2018 = 1426; n2019 = 1595) were compared for unattended consultations (i.e., scheduled consultations with patients not showing-up); initial/follow-up consultations; hospital clinician/general practitioner referrals; initial consultations with radiologists not recommending interventions; procedural conversion rate (PCR; i.e., No. initial consultations resulting in interventions over the total number of initial consultations performed for the same clinical indication). A survey was conducted in 159 patients to determine their satisfaction. RESULTS: Consultations increased from 2011 to 2019 by 130%. In 2018-2019, the number of unattended consultations was stable (7.0% vs 6.6%; P = .68). The referrals were for back pain (42.2%), interventional oncology (40.5%), and arteriovenous malformations (9.0%). For back pain, in 2019, there were fewer consultations with radiologists not recommending interventions and increased PCR compared to 2018 (11.9% vs. 17.7%; 88.1% vs. 82.3%; respectively; P = .01). For interventional oncology, follow-up consultations and general practitioner referrals increased in 2019 compared to 2018 (43.0% vs 35.3%; P = .01; 24.4% vs. 12.7%; P < .01; respectively). No other changes were noted. Cumulative 2018-2019 PCR was ≥ 85.4%. 99.2% responders highly appreciated their IROC experience. Quality of secretarial and medical services were the main aspects evaluated to rate the experience with IROC. CONCLUSION: IROC results in high PCR. Recent changes in referral/impact on IR practice were noted with patients referred for back pain and interventional oncology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: Level 4, Case Series.

Provision of Italian diagnostic reference levels for diagnostic and interventional radiology.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnostic reference level (DRL) is a useful tool for the optimisation of medical exposures. Thus, a Working Party coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health and the National Workers Compensation Authority has been formed to provide Italian DRLs, for both diagnostic and interventional procedures, to be used as appropriate for the implementation of the 2013/59 European Directive into the national regulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The multidisciplinary Working Party was formed by professionals involved in diagnostic and interventional radiology medical exposures and started from a critical revision of both the literature and the results of previous Italian surveys. The procedures were divided into five sections for adult (projection radiography, mammography, diagnostic fluoroscopy, CT and interventional radiology) and two sections for paediatric patients (projection radiography and CT). The provided DRL values have been identified for "normal" adult patients and for age-classes of paediatric patients. RESULTS: Some of the DRL values provided by the Working Party are reported in this study as an example, divided by adult/paediatric patients, radiological technique and examination: specifically, DRLs for new radiological practices and new dose quantities as DRLs metric were introduced. The median value (rather than the mean) for each procedure, derived from a sample of patients, has to be compared with the corresponding DRL value, and dosimetric data related to a minimum number of patients should be collected for each examination. CONCLUSIONS: The approach to the definition and use of DRLs through guidelines of national Authorities in collaboration with scientific Associations should simplify the periodical updating and could be useful for keeping the optimisation of medical exposures faithful to the development of radiological practice.

2020 SCCT Guideline for Training Cardiology and Radiology Trainees as Independent Practitioners (Level II) and Advanced Practitioners (Level III) in Cardiovascular Computed Tomography: A Statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography.

Cardiovascular computed tomography (CCT) is a well-validated non-invasive imaging tool with an ever-expanding array of applications beyond the assessment of coronary artery disease. These include the evaluation of structural heart diseases, congenital heart diseases, peri-procedural electrophysiology applications, and the functional evaluation of ischemia. This breadth requires a robust and diverse training curriculum to ensure graduates of CCT training programs meet minimum competency standards for independent CCT interpretation. This statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography aims to supplement existing societal training guidelines by providing a curriculum and competency framework to inform the development of a comprehensive, integrated training experience for cardiology and radiology trainees in CCT.

Society of Interventional Radiology Clinical Practice Guideline for Inferior Vena Cava Filters in the Treatment of Patients with Venous Thromboembolic Disease: Developed in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology, American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma, American Heart Association, Society for Vascular Surgery, and Society for Vascular Medicine.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in the treatment of patients with or at substantial risk of venous thromboembolic disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert panel developed key questions to address in the guideline, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. Evidence was graded based on a standard methodology, which was used to inform the development of recommendations. RESULTS: The systematic review identified a total of 34 studies that provided the evidence base for the guideline. The expert panel agreed on 18 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Although the evidence on the use of IVC filters in patients with or at risk of venous thromboembolic disease varies in strength and quality, the panel provides recommendations for the use of IVC filters in a variety of clinical scenarios. Additional research is needed to optimize care for this patient population.