Differences in Anatomic Adaptation and Injury Patterns Related to Valgus Extension Overload in Overhead Throwing Athletes.

The purpose of our study was to determine differences in adaptative and injury patterns in the elbow related to valgus extension overload (VEO) in overhead throwing athletes by age. A total of 86 overhead throwing athletes and 23 controls underwent MRI or MR arthrography (MRA) of the elbow. Throwing athletes were divided by age into three groups: ≤16 years (26 subjects), 17-19 years (25 subjects), and ≥20 years (35 subjects). Consensus interpretation of each MRI was performed, with measurements of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) thickness and subchondral sclerosis at the radial head, humeral trochlea, and olecranon process. A higher frequency of apophyseal and stress injuries was seen in adolescent athletes and increased incidence of soft tissue injuries was observed in older athletes. Early adaptive and degenerative changes were observed with high frequency independent of age. Significant differences were observed between athletes and controls for UCL thickness (p < 0.001) and subchondral sclerosis at the radial head (p < 0.001), humeral trochlea (p < 0.001), and olecranon process (p < 0.001). Significant differences based on athlete age were observed for UCL thickness (p < 0.001) and subchondral sclerosis at the olecranon process (p = 0.002). Our study highlights differences in anatomic adaptations related to VEO at the elbow between overhead throwing athletes and control subjects, as well as across age in throwing athletes.

Soft tissue pathology for the radiologist: a tumor board primer with 2020 WHO classification update.

Radiologists serve an important role in the diagnosis and staging of soft tissue tumors, often through participation in multidisciplinary tumor board teams. While an important function of the radiologist is to review pertinent imaging and assist in the differential diagnosis, a critical role is to ensure that there is concordance between the imaging and the pathologic diagnosis. This requires a basic understanding of the pathology of soft tissue tumors, particularly in the case of diagnostic dilemmas or incongruent imaging and histologic features. This work is intended to provide an overview of soft tissue pathology for the radiologist to optimize participation in multidisciplinary orthopedic oncology tumor boards, allowing for contribution to management decisions with expertise beyond image interpretation.

Luminal obstruction in uncomplicated appendicitis: Detection with sonography and potential clinical implications.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of luminal obstruction on appendiceal graded compression sonography (US) in patients with uncomplicated appendicitis and test the hypothesis that this frequency is similar to the failure rates of primary antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated appendicitis when treatment selection is based on CT findings. METHODS: Sonograms of 150 consecutive patients with appendicitis diagnosed on ultrasound (US) and proven histopathologically were retrospectively evaluated; 114 (76.0%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, that is, appendicitis without gangrene or perforation, and were evaluated for appendicolithiasis and lymphoid hyperplasia using previously published sonographic criteria, and for luminal obstruction. RESULTS: Of the 114 patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, US demonstrated no luminal obstruction in 74 (64.9%) and luminal obstruction in 40 (35.1%, P = .018), the latter including 16 (40.0%) with lymphoid hyperplasia and 24 (60.0%, P = .074) with appendicolithiasis. CONCLUSIONS: US demonstrated luminal obstruction in 35.1% of patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, similar to the published failure rates of antibiotic therapy when treatment selection is based on CT. This confirms the hypothesis, supporting the possibility that undiagnosed luminal obstruction may account for treatment failures when patients are selected by CT for primary antibiotic therapy, and suggests a role for US in selecting patients without luminal obstruction for antibiotic therapy.

Comparative Diagnostic Utility of Low-Dose Breast-Specific Gamma Imaging to Current Clinical Standard.

To retrospectively compare low-dose (7-10 mCi) to high-dose (15-30 mCi) breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) in the detection of breast cancer. A retrospective review of 223 consecutive women who underwent BSGI exam between February 2011 and August 2013 with subsequent pathologic analysis was performed. Women were divided into low-dose and high-dose groups. The results of BSGI and pathology were compared, and the sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were determined. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate specificity using benign follow-up imaging to establish true-negative results. There were 223 women who met inclusion criteria with 109 patients with 153 lesions in the low-dose group and 114 patients with 145 lesions in the high-dose group. Pathologic correlation demonstrates sensitivities of 97.6% (95% CI = 90.9-99.6%) and 94.6% (95% CI = 84.2-98.6%; p = 0.093), PPVs of 62.1% (95% CI = 53.2-70.3%) and 50.5% (95% CI = 40.6-60.3%, p = 0.089), and NPVs of 90.5% (95% CI = 68.2-98.3%) and 92.5% (95% CI = 78.5-98.0%, p = 0.781) in the low-dose and high-dose groups, respectively. Subgroup analysis included 72 patients with 98 lesions in the low-dose group and 116 patients with 132 lesions in the high-dose group, with a specificity of 53.7% (95% CI = 39.7-67.1%) and 66.3% (95% CI = 56.2-75.2%%, p = 0.143), respectively. Low-dose BSGI demonstrated high sensitivity and NPV in the detection of breast cancer comparable to the current standard dose BSGI, with moderate specificity and PPV in a limited subgroup analysis, which was associated with a substantial number of false-positives.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Various Imaging Modalities for Suspected Lower Extremity Stress Fractures: A Systematic Review With Evidence-Based Recommendations for Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: The literature is filled with conflicting findings regarding diagnostic accuracy and protocols for imaging suspected lower extremity stress fractures. The absence of systematic reviews on this topic has limited the development of evidence-based recommendations for appropriate imaging protocols in cases of suspected lower extremity stress fractures. PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy statistics of imaging modalities used to diagnose lower extremity stress fractures and to synthesize evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A generic search strategy for published studies was performed using multiple databases. A study was eligible for inclusion if it met all of the following criteria: (1) at least 1 diagnostic imaging modality was studied, (2) at least 1 radiological reference standard was used, (3) the study reported or allowed computation of diagnostic accuracy statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio), (4) a full-text version was available, (5) the article was written in English, and (6) the study included lower extremity stress fractures. Studies that examined asymptomatic individuals or patients with fractures due to disease or pharmacologic intervention were excluded. RESULTS: Reported sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were as follows: For conventional radiography, sensitivity ranged from 12% (0%-29%) to 56% (39%-72%) and specificity ranged from 88% (55%-100%) to 96% (87%-100%). For nuclear scintigraphy (NS), sensitivity ranged from 50% (23%-77%) to 97% (90%-100%) and specificity from 33% (12%-53%) to 98% (93%-100%). For magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), sensitivity ranged from 68% (45%-90%) to 99% (95%-100%) and specificity from 4% (0%-11%) to 97% (88%-100%). For computed tomography, sensitivity ranged from 32% (8%-57%) to 38% (16%-59%) and specificity from 88% (55%-100%) to 98% (91%-100%). For ultrasound, sensitivity ranged from 43% (26%-61%) to 99% (95%-100%) and specificity from 13% (0%-45%) to 79% (61%-96%). CONCLUSION: MRI was identified as the most sensitive and specific imaging test for diagnosing stress fractures of the lower extremity. When MRI is available, NS is not recommended because of its low specificity, high dosage of ionizing radiation, and other limitations. Conventional radiographs are likely to result in false negatives upon initial presentation, particularly in the early stages of stress fracture, and in some cases may not reveal an existing stress fracture at any time. A diagnostic imaging algorithm was developed with specific recommendations for cost-efficient imaging of low-risk and high-risk suspected stress fractures.