Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this article is to review the postoperative MRI appearances of irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (RCTs) after surgery was performed using newer techniques, including patch repair, muscle tendon transfer, superior capsular reconstruction, and subacromial balloon implantation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Newer surgical techniques are emerging for the management of massive RCTs. As radiologists become increasingly likely to encounter postoperative imaging studies of RCTs repaired using these techniques, familiarity with the normal postoperative appearances and complications associated with these techniques becomes important.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of landmark-based and image-guided intraarticular steroid injections for the initial treatment of a population with adhesive capsulitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A decision analytic model from the health care system perspective over a 6-month time frame for 50-year-old patients with clinical findings consistent with adhesive capsulitis was used to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of three techniques for administering intraarticular steroid to the glenohumeral joint: landmark based (also called blind), ultrasound guided, and fluoroscopy guided. Input data on cost, probability, and utility estimates were obtained through a comprehensive literature search and from expert opinion. The primary effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Costs were estimated in 2017 U.S. dollars. RESULTS:Ultrasound-guided injections were the dominant strategy for the base case, because it was the least expensive ($1280) and most effective (0.4096 QALY) strategy of the three options overall. The model was sensitive to the probabilities of getting the steroid into the joint by means of blind, ultrasound-guided, and fluoroscopy-guided techniques and to the costs of the ultrasound-guided and blind techniques. Two-way sensitivity analyses showed that ultrasound-guided injections were favored over blind and fluoroscopy-guided injections over a range of reasonable probabilities and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ultrasound-guided injections were cost-effective in 44% of simulations, compared with 34% for blind injections and 22% for fluoroscopy-guided injections and over a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Ultrasound-guided injections are the most cost-effective option for the initial steroid-based treatment of patients with adhesive capsulitis. Blind and fluoroscopy-guided injections can also be cost-effective when performed by a clinician likely to accurately administer the medication into the correct location.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to determine whether adding DWI to conventional MRI of the sacroiliac joints improves the diagnostic performance of MRI readers in the detection of sacroiliitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:values of patients with and those without sacroiliitis were compared. RESULTS:AUC was 0.758 (95% CI, 0.67-0.83). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The addition of DWI to conventional MRI does not significantly improve overall diagnostic performance in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, or confidence in the detection of inflammatory sacroiliitis, but it does have increased specificity and interobserver agreement. ADC threshold values can be used as predictors of sacroiliitis but give no added advantage over MRI with DWI.

Radiographs are indicated as the first imaging test in all patients with chronic wrist pain, regardless of the suspected diagnosis. When radiographs are normal or equivocal, advanced imaging with MRI (without or without intravenous contrast or following arthrography), CT (usually without contrast), and ultrasound each has a role in establishing a diagnosis. Furthermore, these examinations may contribute to staging disease, treatment planning, and prognostication, even when radiographs are diagnostic of a specific condition. Which examination or examinations are best depends on the specific location of pain and the clinically suspected conditions. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to identify the specialty characteristics of providers referring musculoskeletal (MSK) extremity imaging examinations to radiologists, so as to better understand the drivers of MSK imaging utilization and potentially improve the appropriateness of such imaging examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Data on provider referral for MSK extremity imaging services were extracted from the 2014 Medicare Referring Provider Utilization for Procedures public use file, which aggregates data on diagnostic procedures according to referring provider identities and service codes. MSK extremity imaging services were identified using Neiman Institute Types of Service codes. The referring provider specialty was identified from cross-linked Medicare provider characteristics files. RESULTS:For 4,275,647 MSK extremity imaging examinations ordered, the most common specialties of the referring providers were orthopedic surgery (37.6% of ordered examinations), internal medicine (20.2%), family practice (14.8%), emergency medicine (7.9%), and rheumatology (5.7%). Orthopedic surgery was the referring specialty that most commonly ordered MSK extremity CT (33,465 ordered examinations; for all other specialties, < 2000 examinations), MRI (325,485 examinations; for all other specialities, < 20,000 examinations), and radiography (1,249,748 examinations; for all other specialities, < 850,000 examinations), whereas internal medicine was the referring specialty that most commonly ordered MSK extremity ultrasound examinations (8052 ordered examinations; for all other specialties, < 6000 examinations). Among the select specialties most relevant to MSK imaging, the most frequent referrers after orthopedic surgeons were rheumatologists, for radiography (236,057 ordered examinations) and ultrasound (2034 examinations), and podiatrists, for CT (1201 examinations) and MRI (19,159 examinations). The most commonly ordered individual MSK extremity imaging services were knee radiography, with 190,354 examinations ordered by orthopedic surgeons; hand radiography, with 66,167 examinations ordered by rheumatologists; foot radiography, with 137,042 examinations ordered by podiatrists; shoulder radiography, with 11,299 examinations ordered by sports medicine specialists; and hip radiography, with 9838 examinations ordered by physiatrists. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Referral patterns for MSK imaging vary considerably by provider specialty. Referral pattern insights may guide targeted efforts by radiologists to ensure the appropriateness of such examinations.

Purpose: To demonstrate the appearance of osseous pathologies other than traumatic bone marrow edema using DECT with virtual noncalcium application for bone marrow edema and color overlay in patients presenting acutely to the emergency department with atraumatic musculoskeletal pain. Materials and Methods: This study was IRB approved and informed consent was waived. 166 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department from 2/1/2017 - 7/1/2017 who underwent DECT (Somatom Force, Siemens) for musculoskeletal indications were retrospectively identified. CTs performed for the indication of trauma (n=113) were excluded. Post-processing was performed offline using a virtual noncalcium algorithm with color overlay (syngo.via; Siemans). Demographics were extracted from the electronic medical record. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: In the study period, 20 females and 31 males, average age 59 years (range 20-92) underwent 53 CTs. Indications for imaging were infection (n=28), postoperative pain (n=2), and atraumatic pain (n=23). 34 (64%) had only soft tissue findings or were negative. 19 (36%) demonstrated atraumatic osseous etiologies of pain including metastasis, primary bone tumor, osteomyelitis, and inflammatory or infectious arthropathy. The appearance of these etiologies with color overlay is illustrated. 15 (28%) underwent subsequent imaging with MRI, bone scan, or PET with concordant results and these correlates are shown. Conclusion: DECT has emerged as a technology for detecting traumatic bone marrow edema. Bone marrow edema related to other, atraumatic etiologies including inflammatory arthropathy, tumor, and infection are also visually highlighted by this technique. In the emergent setting, DECT with virtual noncalcium subtraction and color overlay may be a useful adjunct to provide a visual aid for the detection or exclusion of marrow edema or amarrow infiltrating process in patients presenting with atraumatic musculoskeletal pain

Purpose: To determine if direct magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) is more cost-effective than a non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the management of superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears. Materials and Methods: Our base case was a 25-year-old with clinical findings of a SLAP tear in whom an imaging test is being ordered for further management. Decision analysis software (Tree Age Pro) was used to create a model from the healthcare perspective to evaluate the cost effectiveness of 4 imaging strategies: 3-Tesla (T) MRA, 3T MRI, 1.5T MRA and 1.5TMRI. Probability and utility estimates were obtained from published literature. Commercial insurance and Medicaid reimbursements were estimated using 2017 Medicare rates. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) over a 2-year period and costs were calculated in 2017 U.S. dollars. Results: 3T MRI was the least expensive ($5975) and most effective (1.62278 QALY) strategy for our base case and was dominant to 3T MRA ($6569, 1.61732 QALY), 1.5T MRA ($6790, 1.60517 QALY) and 1.5T MRI ($6823, 1.58544 QALY). The results remained robust and did not change over a reasonable range of costs, utilities and probabilities in 1-way sensitivity analyses. 3T MRA only becomes a cost-effective option if the specificity of 3T MRI drops below 91% with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 or below 88.5% with WTP threshold of $50,000. If 3T is excluded from the analysis, 1.5T MRA is dominant for our base case but 1.5T MRI also becomes a cost effective option if its specificity is higher than 68%. Conclusion: 3TMRI is themost cost-effective option for management of SLAP tears. If a 3T magnet is not available, 1.5T MRA is the most cost effective option. In both circumstances, the most cost effective option is the test with highest specificity

Purpose: As glenohumeral osteoarthritis progresses, there is increased risk for posterior glenoid bone loss which impacts an increasingly common treatment for these patients, total shoulder arthroplasty. Defining the level of maximum posterior bone loss and accurate assessment of its severity, using glenoid version measurements, are crucial to correctly align the glenoid prosthesis with glenoid to prevent prosthetic failure. While the importance of this information is clear, how these measurements should be performed remains in question with several techniques described in the literature. The purpose of this study was to define the most accurate level to measure glenoid version on CT for the most clinically relevant variants of posterior glenoid bone loss, Walch B2 and B3 types. Materials and Methods: 386 consecutive CT shoulder studies performed for shoulder arthroplasty preoperative planning between 2013- 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with B2 and B3 glenoid types were included. Two radiologists measured glenoid retroversion independently according to Friedman method on true axial CT images using the "intermediate glenoid line", at three glenoid heights: 25% (upper) 50% (equator) and 75% (lower). Results: 29 B2 and 8 B3 glenoid types were included. There was no statistically significant difference found in the retroversion measurements performed by each reader at the three glenoid levels on the B2 or B3 glenoid types (Mean angles (%) in upper, equator and lower in B2: 16.5, 17,0 and 17.5 and B3: 20.6, 20.7 and 23.2, respectively). There was substantial inter-reader correlation (r>=0.7) in angle measurements. Conclusion: Our study suggests that glenoid version can be accurately measured at any level between 25%-75%of the glenoid height forWalch B2 and B3 types. We recommend that the glenoid equator be used as the reference in order to assure consistent and reliable version measurements in this group of patients

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Correlation of imaging studies and reference standard outcomes is a significant challenge in radiology. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a new communication tool by assessing the ability of this system to correctly match the imaging studies to arthroscopy reports and qualitatively assessing radiologist behavior before and after the implementation of this system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a commercially available communication or educational tool and applying a novel matching rule algorithm, radiology and arthroscopy reports were matched from January 17, 2017 to March 1, 2017 based on anatomy. The interpreting radiologist was presented with email notifications containing the impression of the imaging report and the entire arthroscopy report. Total correlation rate of appropriate report pairings, modality-specific correlation rate, and the anatomy-specific correlation rate were calculated. Radiologists using the system were given a survey. RESULTS: Overall correlation rate for all musculoskeletal imaging was 83.1% (433 or 508). Low correlation was found in fluoroscopic procedures at 74.4%, and the highest correlation was found with ultrasound at 88.4%. Anatomic location varied from 51.6% for spine to 98.8% for hips and pelvis studies. Survey results revealed 87.5% of the respondents reporting being either satisfied or very satisfied with the new communication tool. The survey also revealed that some radiologists reviewed more cases than before. CONCLUSIONS: Matching of radiology and arthroscopy reports by anatomy allows for excellent report correlation (83.1%). Automated correlation improves the quality and efficiency of feedback to radiologists, providing important opportunities for learning and improved accuracy.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Here we review the current state of multicenter radiology research (MRR), and utilize a survey of experienced researchers to identify common advantages, barriers, and resources to guide future investigators. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Association of University Radiologists established a Radiology Research Alliance task force, Multi-center Research Studies in Radiology, composed of 12 society members to review MRR. A REDCap survey was designed to gain more insight from experienced researchers. Recipients were authors identified from a PubMed database search, utilizing search terms "multicenter" or "multisite" and "radiology." The survey included investigator background information, reasons why, barriers to, and resources that investigators found helpful in conducting or participating in MRR. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 23 of 80 recipients (29%), the majority (76%) of whom served as a primary investigator on at least one MRR project. Respondents reported meeting collaborators at national or international (74%) and society (39%) meetings. The most common perceived advantages of MRR were increased sample size (100%) and improved generalizability (91%). External funding was considered the most significant barrier to MRR, reported by 26% of respondents. Institutional funding, setting up a central picture archiving and communication system, and setting up a central database were considered a significant barrier by 30%, 22%, and 22% of respondents, respectively. Resources for overcoming barriers included motivated staff (74%), strong leadership (70%), regular conference calls (57%), and at least one face-to-face meeting (57%). CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to MRR include funding and establishing a central database and a picture archiving and communication system. Upon embarking on an MRR project, forming a motivated team who meets and speaks regularly is essential.