Faculty Bibliography

Improvements in prostate MR imaging techniques and the introduction of MR imaging-targeted biopsies have had central roles in prostate cancer (PCa) management. The role of MR imaging has progressed from largely staging patients with biopsy-proven PCa to detecting, characterizing, and guiding the biopsy of suspected PCa. These diagnostic advances, combined with improved therapeutic interventions, have led to a more sophisticated and individually tailored approach to patients' unique PCa profile. This review discusses the MR imaging, a standardized reporting scheme, and the role of fusion-targeted prostate biopsy.

Scientific rigor should be consistently applied to quality improvement (QI) research to ensure that healthcare interventions improve quality and patient safety before widespread implementation. This article provides an overview of the various study designs that can be used for QI research depending on the stage of investigation, scope of the QI intervention, constraints on the researchers and intervention being studied, and evidence needed to support widespread implementation. The most commonly used designs in QI studies are quasi-experimental designs. Randomized controlled trials and cluster randomized trials are typically reserved for large-scale research projects evaluating the effectiveness of QI interventions that may be implemented broadly, have more than a minimal impact on patients, or are costly. Systematic reviews of QI studies will play an important role in providing overviews of evidence supporting particular QI interventions or methods of achieving change. We also review the general requirements for developing quality measures for reimbursement, public reporting, and pay-for-performance initiatives. A critical part of the testing process for quality measures includes assessment of feasibility, reliability, validity, and unintended consequences. Finally, publication and critical appraisal of QI work is discussed as an essential component to generating evidence supporting QI initiatives in radiology.

Promoting quality and safety research is now essential for radiology as reimbursement is increasingly tied to measures of quality, patient safety, efficiency, and appropriateness of imaging. This article provides an overview of key features necessary to promote successful quality improvement efforts in radiology. Emphasis is given to current trends and future opportunities for directing research. Establishing and maintaining a culture of safety is paramount to organizations wishing to improve patient care. The correct culture must be in place to support quality initiatives and create accountability for patient care. Focused educational curricula are necessary to teach quality and safety-related skills and behaviors to trainees, staff members, and physicians. The increasingly complex healthcare landscape requires that organizations build effective data infrastructures to support quality and safety research. Incident reporting systems designed specifically for medical imaging will benefit quality improvement initiatives by identifying and learning from system errors, enhancing knowledge about safety, and creating safer systems through the implementation of standardized practices and standards. Finally, validated performance measures must be developed to accurately reflect the value of the care we provide for our patients and referring providers. Common metrics used in radiology are reviewed with focus on current and future opportunities for investigation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using Twitter polls to assess public opinion regarding session content at a national specialty society meeting. METHODS: Twitter polls allow users to embed multiple-choice questions within tweets and automatically aggregate responses. Two radiologists attending the 2016 annual meeting of the ACR posted a Twitter poll containing the hashtag #ACR2016 during 10 meeting sessions addressing socioeconomics/advocacy, patient experience, and social media/informatics (20 polls total). Each poll contained a question asking for an opinion regarding the session's content. Polls were open for responses for 24 hours. RESULTS: The average number of responses per poll was significantly higher for the user with the larger number of Twitter followers (24.3 +/- 14.4 versus 11.2 +/- 9.8, P = .015). A total of 57% of respondents agreed that radiologists' payments should shift to value-based payments, and 86% agreed that radiologists should routinely survey their patients to monitor quality; however, 83% disagreed with basing physician payments on patient satisfaction scores. A total of 85% disagreed that the artificial intelligence supercomputer Watson will entirely replace radiologists. A total of 76% agreed that social media can drive business at less cost than standard marketing. A total of 56% agreed with the direction of the ACR's advocacy and regulatory efforts, whereas 74% considered the ACR's advocacy efforts to be moderately or very useful for their practice. A total of 50% planned to change their practice on the basis of keynote remarks by Dr Ezekiel Emanuel. CONCLUSIONS: Twitter polls provide a free and easy infrastructure to potentially capture global public sentiment during the course of a medical society meeting. Their use may enrich and promote discussions of key session content.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to apply a visual assessment of the intensity and pattern of T1 hyperintensity at MRI to differentiate hemorrhagic renal cysts from renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 144 T1-hyperintense renal lesions (62 cysts, all showing no enhancement on subtracted contrast-enhanced images and either 2-year stability or unenhanced CT density > 70 HU, and 82 histologically confirmed RCCs) in 144 patients were included. Two radiologists independently characterized qualitative features of the T1 hyperintensity in each lesion on unenhanced T1-weighted images. An additional radiologist placed ROIs to measure lesions' T1 signal intensity normalized to that of the psoas muscle. Chi-square and unpaired t tests were performed to compare the pattern of T1 hyperintensity between groups. RESULTS: The T1 hyperintensity was considered marked in 62.9% of cysts and 17.1% of RCCs for reader 1 and in 46.8% of cysts and 8.5% of RCCs for reader 2 (p < 0.001). The T1 hyperintensity exhibited a diffusely homogeneous distribution in 88.7% of cysts and 7.3% of RCCs for reader 1 and in 72.6% of cysts and 4.9% of RCCs for reader 2 (p < 0.001). The combination of both diffusely homogeneous distribution and marked degree of T1 hyperintensity achieved sensitivities of 40.3-56.5%, specificities of 97.6-98.8%, and accuracies of 73.6-79.9% for the diagnosis of T1-hyperintense cysts. The two cases of RCC exhibiting this imaging pattern for at least one reader were both papillary RCCs. Normalized signal intensity was 2.39 +/- 0.99 in T1-hyperintense cysts versus 2.12 +/- 0.84 in T1-hyperintense RCCs (p = 0.088). CONCLUSION: Diffuse T1 hyperintensity, particularly when marked, strongly indicates a hemorrhagic cyst rather than an RCC. Deferral of follow-up imaging may be considered when this imaging appearance is encountered at unenhanced MRI.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to perform a meta-analysis of studies investigating the diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in separating high-risk from low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched in December 2015 for studies reporting diagnostic performance of ADC values for discriminating high-risk from low-risk PCa and providing sufficient data to construct 2 x 2 contingency tables. Diagnostic performance was quantitatively pooled using a bivariate random-effects model including subgroup analysis and assessment of study heterogeneity and methodological quality. RESULTS: 13 studies were included, providing 1107 tumor foci in 705 patients. Heterogeneity among studies was moderate (tau2 = 0.222). Overall sensitivity was 76.9% (95% CI 68.6-83.6%); overall specificity was 77.0% (95% CI 69.9-82.8%); and summary AUC was 0.67. Inverse correlation between sensitivity and specificity (rho = -0.58) indicated interstudy heterogeneity was partly due to variation in threshold for test positivity. Primary biases were readers' knowledge of Gleason score during ADC measurement, lack of prespecified ADC thresholds, and lack of prostatectomy as reference in some studies. Higher sensitivity was seen in studies published within the past 2 years and studies not using b value of at least 2000; higher specificity was associated with involvement of one, rather than two, readers measuring ADC. Field strength, coil selection, and advanced diffusion metrics did not significantly impact diagnostic performance. CONCLUSION: ADC values show moderate accuracy in separating high-risk from low-risk PCa, although important biases may overestimate performance and unexplained sources of heterogeneity likely exist. Further studies using a standardized methodology and addressing identified weaknesses may help guide the use of ADC values for clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a combination of PCA3 and MRI suspicion score (mSS) could further optimize detection of prostate cancer on MRF-TB among men with no previous history of biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 187 men presenting to our institution between 6/12 and 8/14 who underwent multiparametric MRI and PCA3 prior to MRF-TB. Biopsy results, stratified by biopsy indication and PCA3 score, were recorded. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and multivariable logistic regressions were utilized to model the association of PCA3 and mSS with cancer detection on MRF-TB. RESULTS: PCA3 is associated with cancer detection on MRF-TB for men with no prior biopsies (AUC = 0.67, 95% CI 0.59-0.76). Using a cutoff of >/=35, PCA3 was associated with cancer risk among men with mSS 2-3 (p=0.004), but not among those with mSS 4-5 (p=0.340). The interaction of PCA3 and mSS demonstrated significantly higher discrimination for cancer than mSS alone (AUC: 0.83 vs. 0.79, p=0.0434). CONCLUSIONS: Urinary PCA3 is associated with mSS and the detection of cancer on MRF-TB for men with no prior biopsies. PCA3 notably demonstrates a high negative predictive value among mSS 2-3. However, in the case of high suspicion mpMRI, PCA3 is not associated with cancer detection on MRF-TB adding little to cancer diagnosis. Further studies are needed to evaluate the utility of PCA3 in predicting cancer among men with normal mpMRI.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to compare radiologists', referring physicians', and patients' interpretations of expressions within radiology reports to describe findings of likely low clinical significance. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Surveys were completed by abdominal radiologists (n = 13), physicians referring patients for abdominal CT (n = 59), and outpatients awaiting imaging (n = 51) at a large urban academic medical center. Surveys presented 10 expressions for describing an incidental 5-mm liver lesion and asked respondents to select from a list of choices their perceived likelihood that the lesion represented malignancy. Radiologists and referrers were asked supplemental questions. RESULTS: Compared with radiologists' concern, referrers' and patients' concerns were higher for four and seven of the 10 expressions. Only the expression "benign cyst" was associated with no concern in all groups; "most likely a cyst" and "too small to characterize" were associated with median levels of concern of 0% for radiologists, > 0% to 1% for referrers, and > 2% to 5% for patients. Expressions containing the phrase "not excluded" had the highest concern in all groups. Referrers' likelihood of ordering follow-up imaging varied widely for the expressions (e.g., "benign cyst," 2%; "cyst," 22%; "most likely a cyst," 46%; "most likely a cyst, although tumor not excluded," 75%). Overall, the preferred phrase for a 5-mm liver lesion with benign features in normal-risk patients was "cyst" among radiologists and "benign cyst" among referrers. Seventy-six percent of referring physicians thought that radiology reports should indicate whether follow-up imaging is recommended for such lesions. CONCLUSION: Ambiguity in radiologists' language for incidental low-risk findings may contribute to increased patient anxiety and follow-up testing, warranting greater radiologist attention and potentially new practice or reporting strategies.