Ravi V. Gottumukkala

Impact of Vessel Choice on Outcomes of Polyvinyl Alcohol Embolization for Intractable Idiopathic Epistaxis

PURPOSE To determine the safety and efficacy of internal maxillary artery (IMA) and facial artery polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) embolization for treatment of refractory idiopathic epistaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS From 1998-2011, 84 patients were referred for endovascular treatment of intractable idiopathic epistaxis. PVA (range, 180-300 μM) particles were used in all cases. One case required microcoils to prevent nontarget embolization. Medical records were reviewed for early recurrences and complications, which were correlated with the number of vessels receiving embolization using the Mantel-Haenszel χ(2)test for linear association; P<.05 was accepted for significance. RESULTS Vessels chosen for embolization were unilateral IMA in 8 patients, bilateral IMAs in 35 patients, bilateral IMAs with one facial artery in 32 patients, and bilateral IMAs and bilateral facial arteries in 9 patients. Early (<30 d) rebleeding requiring therapy occurred in nine patients (11%). Minor complications occurred in 22 patients (26%) and included mild facial or jaw pain, facial edema, headache, and transient ischemic attack. There was one major complication that consisted of facial skin sloughing and mild lip ulceration in a patient who had embolization of both IMAs and both facial arteries. A linear association was found when the number of vessels receiving embolization was correlated with both the rates of early recurrence (inversely, P = .04) and minor complications (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS An initial treatment strategy involving embolization of bilateral IMAs with or without embolization of facial arteries for refractory idiopathic epistaxis is safe and effective. Additional facial artery embolization reduces the risk of early recurrence but increases the risk of minor complications.

Imaging of the brain in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection.

Abstract Neurologic disease in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients is related either to opportunistic pathogens or to direct central nervous system (CNS) invasion by the human immunodeficiency virus. Despite the increasing availability of antiretroviral therapy, opportunistic infections continue to afflict patients in the developing world and in other populations with limited access to appropriate treatment. Classic CNS infections in the setting of AIDS include toxoplasmosis, cryptococcosis, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, and cytomegalovirus encephalitis. Additionally, AIDS patients are far more susceptible to acquiring CNS tuberculosis and neurosyphilis, both of which exhibit altered disease characteristics in the setting of immunosuppression. Neuroimaging is a crucial component of the diagnostic work-up of these conditions, and findings include, but are not limited to, intracranial mass lesions, white matter disease, meningoencephalitis, vascular complications, and hydrocephalus. Though various disease processes can produce imaging findings that overlap with one another, certain characteristic patterns may suggest a particular pathogen, and advanced imaging techniques and laboratory tests allow for definitive diagnosis. Knowledge of the imaging patterns seen in the setting of AIDS-related CNS disease is vital to the neuroradiologist, whose interpretation may guide decisions related to treatment and further work-up.

Bicuspid aortic valves and thoracic aortic aneurysms in patients with intracranial aneurysms

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs) and thoracic ascending aortic aneurysms (TAAs) in a retrospective cohort of patients treated for intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Methods: Patients treated for IA at our institution between 2002 and 2011 were identified and their clinical records reviewed. Those without an echocardiogram of sufficient quality to assess the aortic valve were excluded. The prevalence of BAVs and TAAs in this remaining cohort was determined based on echocardiography reports, medical records, and cross-sectional chest imaging. Results: Of 1,047 patients, 317 had adequate echocardiography for assessment of BAV. Of these, 82 also had cross-sectional chest imaging. Of the 317 patients, 2 had BAV and 15 had TAA. The prevalence of BAVs (0.6%, 95% confidence interval 0.2%–2.2%) was similar to population prevalence estimates for this condition; however, the prevalence of TAAs (4.7%, 95% confidence interval 2.9%–7.6%) was larger than expected in a normal age- and sex-matched population. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate an association between IA and TAA, but not independently for BAV.

Lung Cancer Screening: Why, When, and How?

This article explains the rationale of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography and provides a practical approach to all relevant aspects of a lung cancer screening program. Imaging protocols, patient eligibility criteria, facility readiness, and reimbursement criteria are addressed step by step. Diagnostic criteria and Lung-RADS (Lung Computed Tomography Screening Reporting and Data System) nodule management pathways are illustrated with examples. Pearls and pitfalls for interpretation of lung cancer screening low-dose chest computed tomography are discussed.

Implications of iodinated contrast media extravasation in the emergency department

Purpose To characterize the management, outcomes, and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) following iodinated contrast media extravasation events in the ED. Methods All ED patients who developed iodinated contrast media extravasation following contrast‐enhanced CT (CECT) from October 2007–December 2016 were retrospectively identified. Medical records were reviewed and management, complications, frequency of surgical consultation, and ED LOS were quantified using descriptive statistics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare ED LOS in patients who did and did not receive surgical consultation. Results A total of 199 contrast extravasation episodes occurred in ED patients during the 9‐year study period. Of these, 42 patients underwent surgical consultation to evaluate the contrast extravasation event. No patient developed progressive symptoms, compartment syndrome, or tissue necrosis, and none received treatment beyond supportive care (warm/cold packs, elevation, compression). Median ED LOS for patients who did and did not receive surgical consultation was 11.3 h versus 9.0 h, respectively (p < 0.01). Conclusion Close observation and supportive care are sufficient for contrast extravasation events in the ED without concerning symptoms (progressive pain/swelling, altered tissue perfusion, sensory changes, or blistering/ulceration). Routine surgical consultation is likely unnecessary in the absence of these symptoms – concordant with the current American College of Radiology guidelines – and may be associated with longer ED LOS without impacting management.

Day of Week, Site of Service, and Patient Complexity Differences in Venous Ultrasound Interpreted by Radiologists Versus Nonradiologists

OBJECTIVE Nationally, nonradiologists interpret an increasing proportion of lower extremity venous duplex ultrasound (LEVDU) examinations. We aimed to study day of week, site of service, and patient complexity differences in LEVDU services interpreted by radiologists versus nonradiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using carrier claims files for a 5% national sample of Medicare beneficiaries from 2012 to 2015, we retrospectively classified all LEVDU examinations by physician specialty (radiologist versus nonradiologist), day of week (weekday versus weekend), site of service, and patient Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores. Pearsons χ2 was used to test statistical significance. RESULTS Of 760,433 LEVDU examinations for which provider specialty could be determined, 439,964 (58%) were interpreted by radiologists and 320,469 (42%) by nonradiologists. On weekends, radiologists interpreted 75% (66,094 of 88,244) and nonradiologists 25% (22,150 of 88,244) (P < .0001). Of LEVDU examinations interpreted by radiologists, 57% were performed in the inpatient or emergency department settings, and 70% of LEVDU examinations interpreted by nonradiologists were performed in the private office or outpatient hospital setting. Radiologists interpreted a slightly larger proportion (17%) of their examinations on patients with more comorbidities (CCI of ≥3) than nonradiologists (15%) (P < .0001). CONCLUSION Compared with nonradiologists, radiologists interpret a disproportionately larger share of weekend (versus weekday) LEVDU examinations and a considerably larger proportion in higher acuity settings. Additionally, the patients on whom they render services have more comorbidities. To optimize around-the-clock patient access to necessary imaging, emerging quality payment programs should consider the timing and sites of service, as well as patient complexity.

Increasing utilization of emergency department neuroimaging in Medicare beneficiaries from 1994 to 2015

Objective: To assess for changes in emergency department (ED) utilization of neuroimaging in Medicare fee‐for‐service beneficiaries from 1994 to 2015. Methods: Using Medicare Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files, annual ED volumes of head computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR), and carotid duplex ultrasound (CDUS) were assessed from 1994 through 2015. Annual volumes of head CT angiography (CTA), neck CTA, head MR angiography (MRA), and neck MRA studies were assessed from 2001 (first year of unique reporting codes) through 2015. Longitudinal population‐based utilization rates were calculated using annual Medicare Part B enrollment, and utilization rates were normalized annually per 1000 ED visits. Results: From 1994 through 2015, ED neuroimaging utilization rates per 1000 ED visits increased 660% overall (compound annual growth rate [CAGR] 9%); 529% for head CT (CAGR 9%); 1451% for head MRI (CAGR 14%); and by 104% for CDUS (CAGR 3%). From 2001 to 2015, rates increased 14,600% (CAGR 43%) and 17,781% (CAGR 45%) for head and neck CTA, respectively, and 525% (CAGR 14%) and 667% (CAGR 16%) for head and neck MRA, respectively. Trends were similar when volumes were normalized for annual Medicare fee‐for‐service enrollment. Non‐contrast head CT was the most common imaging modality throughout the study period (86% of annual neuroimaging volume in 1994; 89% in 2015). Conclusions: In Medicare beneficiaries, neuroimaging utilization in the ED grew unabated from 1994 through 2015, with growth of head and neck CTA far outpacing other modalities. Non‐contrast head CT remains by far the dominant ED neuroimaging examination.

Appropriateness of Extremity Magnetic Resonance Imaging Examinations in an Academic Emergency Department Observation Unit

Introduction Emergency departments (ED) and hospitals face increasing challenges related to capacity, throughput, and stewardship of limited resources while maintaining high quality. Appropriate utilization of extremity magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations within the emergency setting is not well known. Therefore, this study aimed to determine indications for and appropriateness of MRI of the extremities for musculoskeletal conditions in the ED observation unit (EDOU). Methods We conducted this institutional review board-approved, retrospective study in a large, quaternary care academic center and Level I trauma center. An institutional database was queried retrospectively to identify all adult patients undergoing an extremity MRI while in the EDOU during the two-year study period from October 2013 through September 2015. We compared clinical history with the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® for musculoskeletal indications. The primary outcome was appropriateness of musculoskeletal MRI exams of the extremities; examinations with an ACR Criteria score of seven or higher were deemed appropriate. Secondary measures included MRI utilization and imaging findings. Results During the study period, 22,713 patients were evaluated in the EDOU. Of those patients, 4,409 had at least one MRI performed, and 88 MRIs met inclusion criteria as musculoskeletal extremity examinations (2% of all patients undergoing an MRI exam in the EDOU during the study period). The most common exams were foot (27, 31%); knee (26, 30%); leg/femur (10, 11%); and shoulder (10, 11%). The most common indications were suspected infection (42, 48%) and acute trauma (23, 26%). Fifty-six percent of exams were performed with intravenous contrast; and 83% (73) of all MRIs were deemed appropriate based on ACR Criteria. The most common reason for inappropriate imaging was lack of performance of radiographs prior to MRI. Conclusion The majority of musculoskeletal extremity MRI examinations performed in the EDOU were appropriate based on ACR Appropriateness Criteria. However, the optimal timing and most-appropriate site for performance of many clinically appropriate musculoskeletal extremity MRIs performed in the EDOU remains unclear. Potential deferral to the outpatient setting may be a preferred population health management strategy.

Radiologists Are Actually Well Positioned to Innovate in Patient Experience

Patient experience is becoming increasingly prioritized, most notably as a component of recently passed health care legislation that aims to link physician reimbursement to quality of care and cost-effectiveness. For several reasons, radiologists are better positioned to seize opportunities to enhance patient experience than is readily apparent. We propose that discrete components along the imaging value chain can be evaluated specifically for their effect on patient experience and improved to this end. We also emphasize that the field of radiology has traditionally been the earliest adopter and a serial innovator in health information technology, and we suggest possible ways to leverage the newest technological tools to improve patient experience. Finally, we discuss how carefully vetted opportunities for direct patient interaction might expand the reach of diagnostic radiologists as members of integrated health systems. We believe that emerging patient experience metrics present unconventional opportunities for radiologists to make imaging even more meaningful for the many patients who entrust us with their care. SIX SUMMARY POINTS.

Allergic-like contrast reactions in the ED: Incidence, management, and impact on patient disposition.

Purpose: Determine the incidence, management, and impact on patient disposition of allergic‐like contrast reactions (ALCR) to intravenous iodinated contrast in the emergency department (ED). Methods: All ED patients who developed an ALCR following contrast‐enhanced CT (CECT) from June 2011–December 2016 were retrospectively identified. Medical records were reviewed and reaction severity, management, and disposition were quantified using descriptive statistics. The total number of consecutive CECTs performed in the ED were available from June 2011–March 2016 and were used to derive ALCR incidence over that time period. Results: A total of 90 patients developed an ALCR during the study period. An ALCR incidence of 0.2% was derived based on 74 ALCRs occurring out of 47,059 consecutive contrast injections in ED patients from June 2011–April 2016. Reaction severity was mild in 63/90 (70%) and moderate in 27/90 (30%) cases; no patient developed a severe reaction by American College of Radiology criteria. The most commonly administered treatments were diphenhydramine in 67/90 (74%), corticosteroid in 24/90 (27%), and epinephrine in 13/90 (14%); symptoms subsequently resolved in all cases. No patient required inpatient admission for contrast reaction alone, and 5 patients were sent to the ED observation unit for post‐epinephrine monitoring and subsequently discharged. Conclusion: ALCR among ED patients undergoing CECT are rare, generally of mild severity, respond well to pharmacologic management, and do not alter patient disposition in most cases. Familiarity with symptoms, management, and prevention strategies is increasingly relevant to the emergency physician given the ubiquity of CECT.