Shoulder measurements on MRI: Statistical analysis of patients without and with rotator cuff tears and predictive modeling.

This study aims to determine significant differences between various measurements of shoulder structures and relationships in patients with and without rotator cuff tears and identify a subset of these measurements that may merit further investigation. Shoulder MRIs of 120 patients with rotator cuff tears (RCT group) and 80 patients with normal examinations (No RCT group) were retrospectively identified. Numerous measurements of shoulder anatomy and relationships and pathology characterization were performed for each study. The mean and ranges of measurements for each group were identified, and P-values were calculated to assess differences between the two groups. Classification and Regression Tree (CART) identified prediction models for separating the two groups based on these shoulder MRI measurements. Statistically significant differences were observed for 9 of 18 of the shoulder measurements between the two groups (P < 0.05). Using long head of biceps tendon tear, tendinosis, and subacromial-subdeltoid bursal fluid, the prediction model from CART demonstrated 99.5% accuracy in separating the two groups. Subacromial distance, subacromial spur size, and acromioclavicular osteophyte could also separate the two groups with 97.5% accuracy. Other measures less commonly associated with impingement and rotator cuff tears could also be used to separate the two groups with up to 81.5% accuracy. This study introduces new measures and clarifies ranges for existing measurements on shoulder MRI. Abnormalities of some of these measurements may be associated with subacromial impingement, and combinations of these parameters may be useful for separating patients with or without rotator cuff tears. Clin. Anat. 33:173-186, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

What the radiologist needs to know about urolithiasis: part 1--pathogenesis, types, assessment, and variant anatomy.

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews types of urinary calculi and their imaging appearances, presents direct and secondary imaging findings of urolithiasis, and provides an overview of treatment methods. Pertinent imaging findings that impact clinical management are highlighted. The implications of complex or variant genitourinary anatomy are reviewed. We outline a standard format for the reporting of urolithiasis to facilitate informed clinical management decisions. CONCLUSION: Unenhanced CT is the preferred examination for evaluation of urolithiasis because of its availability, ease of performance, and high sensitivity. An awareness of the important imaging findings to report allows appropriate and efficient therapy.

What the radiologist needs to know about urolithiasis: part 2--CT findings, reporting, and treatment.

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews types of urinary calculi and their imaging appearances, presents direct and secondary imaging findings of urolithiasis, and provides an overview of treatment methods. Pertinent imaging findings that affect clinical management are highlighted. The implications of complex or variant genitourinary anatomy are reviewed. We outline a standard format for the reporting of urolithiasis to facilitate informed clinical management decisions. CONCLUSION: Unenhanced CT is the preferred examination for evaluation of urolithiasis because of its availability, ease of performance, and high sensitivity. An awareness of the important imaging findings to report allows appropriate and efficient therapy.

An observer study for a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment for digital mammography.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to investigate improving work flow efficiency by shortening the reading time of digital mammograms using a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment and to increase detection sensitivity using CARP, compared to the current protocol, commonly referred to as the quadrant view (QV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 cases were selected for a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) study to evaluate two image display work flows, CARP and QV, in the screening environment. A Web-based tool was developed for scoring, reporting, and statistical analysis. Cases were scored for and stratified by difficulty. A total of six radiologists of differing levels of training ranging from dedicated mammographers to senior radiology residents participated. Each was timed while interpreting the 200 cases in groups of 50, first using QV and then, after a washout period, using CARP. The data were analyzed using ROC and κ analysis. Interpretation times were also assessed. RESULTS: Using QV, readers' average area under the ROC curve was 0.68 (range, 0.54-0.73). Using CARP, readers' average area under the ROC curve was 0.71 (range, 0.66-0.75). There was no statistically significant difference in reader performance using either work flow. However, there was a statistically significant reduction in the average interpretation time of negative cases from 64.7 seconds using QV to 58.8 seconds using CARP. CONCLUSIONS: CARP determines the display order of regions of interest depending on computer-aided detection findings. This is a variation of traditional computer-aided detection for digital mammography that has the potential to reduce interpretation times of studies with negative findings without significantly affecting sensitivity, thus allowing improved work flow efficiency in the screening environment, in which, in most settings, the majority of cases are negative.