RESUMO
Head computed tomography (CT) is the preferred imaging modality for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). The routine use of head CT in low-risk individuals with mild TBI offers no clinical benefit but also causes notable health and financial burden. Despite the availability of related guidelines, studies have reported considerable rate of non-indicated head CT requests. The objectives were to provide an overall estimate for the head CT overutilization rate and to identify the factors contributing to the overuse. A systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases was conducted up to November 2023, following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Two reviewers independently selected eligible articles and extracted data. Quality assessment was performed using a bias risk tool, and a random-effects model was used for data synthesis. Fourteen studies, encompassing 28,612 patients, were included, with 27,809 undergoing head CT scans. Notably, 75% of the included studies exhibited a moderate to high risk of bias. The overutilization rate for pediatric and adult patients was 27% (95% CI: 5-50%) and 32% (95% CI: 21-44%), respectively. An alternative rate, focusing on low-risk pediatric patients, was 54% (95% CI: 20-89%). Overutilization rates showed no significant difference between teaching and non-teaching hospitals. Patients with mTBI from falls or assaults were less likely to receive non-indicated scans. There was no significant association between physician specialty or seniority and overuse, nor between patients' age or sex and the likelihood of receiving a non-indicated scan. Approximately one-third of head CT scans in mTBI cases are avoidable, underscoring the necessity for quality improvement programs to reduce unnecessary imaging and its associated burdens.
RESUMO
Accurate detection of respiratory system damage including COVID-19 is considered one of the crucial applications of deep learning (DL) models using CT images. However, the main shortcoming of the published works has been unreliable reported accuracy and the lack of repeatability with new datasets, mainly due to slice-wise splits of the data, creating dependency between training and test sets due to shared data across the sets. We introduce a new dataset of CT images (ISFCT Dataset) with labels indicating the subject-wise split to train and test our DL algorithms in an unbiased manner. We also use this dataset to validate the real performance of the published works in a subject-wise data split. Another key feature provides more specific labels (eight characteristic lung features) rather than being limited to COVID-19 and healthy labels. We show that the reported high accuracy of the existing models on current slice-wise splits is not repeatable for subject-wise splits, and distribution differences between data splits are demonstrated using t-distribution stochastic neighbor embedding. We indicate that, by examining subject-wise data splitting, less complicated models show competitive results compared to the exiting complicated models, demonstrating that complex models do not necessarily generate accurate and repeatable results.
RESUMO
Background: Nasolacrimal duct obstruction is usually treated using endoscopic or external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). The anatomic outcomes of both the endoscopic and external approaches are considered excellent. However, anatomic success does not translate into patient satisfaction. The current study assessed pre- and postoperative lacrimal problems using the symptom-based Lacrimal Symptom Questionnaire (Lac-Q) and investigated patient satisfaction depending on the choice of surgical technique. Methods: A total of 112 eligible patients with lacrimal problems treated using external or endonasal DCR at the ophthalmology and ear, nose, and throat clinics at Skane University Hospital, Scania, Sweden, over a four-year period, were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were considered eligible if they experienced preoperative epiphora and had lacrimal duct stenosis. They were offered treatment using either external or endonasal DCR and were allowed to freely choose the technique. Exclusion criteria consisted of previous ipsilateral DCR, congenital NLDO, ageâ <â 18 years, presence of cancer, previous orbital trauma, or noncompliance with postoperative follow-up. After surgery, the patients were sent the Lac-Q to evaluate their lacrimal symptoms pre- and postoperatively. Complementary questions were added pertaining to the operative scar and the patients' overall satisfaction with the operation. Results: In total, 67 (60%) patients with ages ranging from 18 to 88 years completed the questionnaire, 33 (49%) of whom underwent external DCR and 34 (51%) endonasal DCR. Of the 67 respondents, 51 (76%) were women and 16 (24%) were men. Patients scored preoperative lacrimal problems highly on the Lac-Q, reporting both symptomatic and social problems due to epiphora. Following surgery, the group that underwent external DCR remained home from work for 2 - 14 days (median, 3.5 days). However, 17 (52%) were retired. After the endonasal DCR, the patients remained home for 0 - 7 days (median, 2 days). Most patients were satisfied after DCR surgery, with both techniques significantly improving total, lacrimal symptom, and social impact scores (all Pâ <â 0.001). No differences in postoperative satisfaction were observed between the external DCR and endonasal DCR groups (Pâ >â 0.05). A small number of patients expressed scar-related concerns after external DCR. Conclusions: The patients perceived lacrimal problems as a significant symptomatic and social burden. Postoperative satisfaction and symptom relief were good regardless of the surgical approach. Further prospective studies assessing patient satisfaction and its correlation with anatomical and functional success rates after external and endonasal DCR could provide robust, practical, real-world implications.
