Faculty Bibliography

Radiology has historically been at the forefront of innovation and the advancement of technology for the benefit of patient care. However, challenges to early implementation prevented most radiologists from adopting and integrating certified electronic health record technology (CEHRT) into their daily workflow despite the early and potential advantages it offered. This circumstance places radiology at a disadvantage in the two payment pathways of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015: the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) and advanced alternative payment models (APMs). Specifically, not integrating CEHRT hampers radiology's ability to receive bonus points in the quality performance category of the MIPS and in parallel threatens certain threshold requirements for advanced APMs under the new Quality Payment Program. Radiology must expand the availability and use of CEHRT to satisfy existing performance measures while creating new performance measures that create value for the health care system. In addition, radiology IT vendors will need to ensure their products (eg, radiology information systems, PACS, and radiology reporting systems) are CEHRT compliant and approved. Such collective efforts will increase radiologists' quality of patient care, contribution to value driven activities, and overall health care relevance.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has utility in detecting post-radiotherapy local recurrence. We conducted a multireader study to evaluate the diagnostic performance of mpMRI for local recurrence after low dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy. METHODS:A total of 19 patients with biochemical recurrence after LDR brachytherapy underwent 3T endorectal coil mpMRI with T2-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with pathologic confirmation. Prospective reads by an experienced prostate radiologist were compared with reads from 4 radiologists of varying experience. Readers identified suspicious lesions and rated each MRI detection parameter. MRI-detected lesions were considered true-positive with ipsilateral pathologic confirmation. Inferences for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), kappa, and index of specific agreement were made with the use of bootstrap resampling. RESULTS:Pathologically confirmed recurrence was found in 15 of 19 patients. True positive recurrences identified by mpMRI were frequently located in the transition zone (46.7%) and seminal vesicles (30%). On patient-based analysis, average sensitivity of mpMRI was 88% (standard error [SE], 3.5%). For highly suspicious lesions, specificity of mpMRI was 75% (SE, 16.5%). On lesion-based analysis, the average PPV was 62% (SE, 6.7%) for all lesions and 78.7% (SE, 10.3%) for highly suspicious lesions. The average PPV for lesions invading the seminal vesicles was 88.8% (n=13). The average PPV was 66.6% (SE, 5.8%) for lesions identified with T2-weighted imaging, 64.9% (SE, 7.3%) for DCE, and 70% (SE, 7.3%) for DWI. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This series provides evidence that mpMRI after LDR brachytherapy is feasible with a high patient-based cancer detection rate. Radiologists of varying experience demonstrated moderate agreement in detecting recurrence.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To characterize online news coverage relating to mammography, including articles' stance toward screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Google News was used to search U.S. news sites over a 9-year period (2006-2015) based on the search terms "mammography" and "mammogram." The top 100 search results were recorded. Identified articles were manually reviewed. RESULTS: The top 100 news articles were from the following sources: local news outlet (50%), national news outlet (24%), nonimaging medical source (13%), entertainment or culture news outlet (6%), business news outlet (4%), peer-reviewed journal (1%), and radiology news outlet (1%). Most common major themes were the screening mammography controversy (29%), description of a new breast imaging technology (23%), dense breasts (11%), and promotion of a public screening initiative (11%). For the most recent year, article stance toward screening mammography was 59%, favorable; 16%, unfavorable; and 25%, neutral. After 2010, there was an abrupt shift in articles' stances from neutral to both favorable and unfavorable. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of online news sources addressed a range of issues related to mammography. National, rather than local, news sites were more likely to focus on the screening controversy and more likely to take an unfavorable view. The controversial United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines may have influenced articles to take a stance on screening mammography. As such online news may impact public perception of the topic and thus potentially impact guideline adherence, radiologists are encouraged to maintain awareness of this online coverage and to support the online dissemination of reliable and accurate information.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of questionnaires completed by patients at the time of abdominopelvic CT performed for abdominal pain on the completeness of clinical information and the identification of potential causes of pain, compared with order requisitions alone. METHODS: 100 outpatient CT examinations performed for the evaluation of abdominal pain were retrospectively reviewed. The specificity of the location of pain was compared between the order requisition and patient questionnaire. An abdominal imaging fellow (Reader 1) and abdominal radiologist (Reader 2) reviewed the examinations independently in two sessions 6 weeks apart (one with only the order requisition and one also with the questionnaire). Readers recorded identified causes of pain and rated their confidence in interpretation (1-5 scale; least to greatest confidence). RESULTS: In 30% of patients, the questionnaire provided a more specific location for pain. Among these, the pain was localized to a specific quadrant in 40%. With having access to the questionnaire, both readers identified additional causes for pain not identified in session 1 (Reader 1, 8.6% [7/81]; Reader 2 5.3% [4/75]). Additional identified causes of pain included diverticulitis, cystitis, peritoneal implants, epiploic appendagitis, osseous metastatic disease, umbilical hernia, gastritis, and SMA syndrome. Confidence in interpretation was significantly greater using the questionnaire for both readers (Reader 1: 4.8 +/- 0.6 vs. 4.0 +/- 0.5; Reader 2: 4.9 +/- 0.3 vs. 4.7 +/- 0.5, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patient questionnaires provide additional relevant clinical history, increased diagnostic yield, and improve radiologists' confidence. Radiology practices are encouraged to implement questionnaires and make these readily available to radiologists at the time of interpretation.