Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE: To perform a survey-based assessment of patients' knowledge of radiologic imaging examinations, including patients' perspectives regarding communication of such information. METHODS: Adult patients were given a voluntary survey before undergoing an outpatient imaging examination at our institution. Survey questions addressed knowledge of various aspects of the examination, as well as experiences, satisfaction, and preferences regarding communication of such knowledge. RESULTS: A total of 176 surveys were completed by patients awaiting CT (n = 45), MRI (n = 41), ultrasound (n = 46), and nuclear medicine (n = 44) examinations. A total of 97.1% and 97.8% of patients correctly identified the examination modality and the body part being imaged, respectively. A total of 45.8% correctly identified whether the examination entailed radiation; 51.1% and 71.4% of patients receiving intravenous or oral contrast, respectively, correctly indicated its administration. A total of 78.6% indicated that the ordering physician explained the examination in advance; among these, 72.1% indicated satisfaction with the explanation. A total of 21.8% and 20.5% indicated consulting the Internet, or friends and family, respectively, to learn about the examination. An overall understanding of the examination was reported by 70.8%. A total of 18.8% had unanswered questions about the examination, most commonly regarding examination logistics, contrast-agent usage, and when results would be available. A total of 52.9% were interested in discussing the examination with a radiologist in advance. Level of understanding was greatest for CT and least for nuclear medicine examinations, and lower when patients had not previously undergone the given examination. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' knowledge of their imaging examinations is frequently incomplete. The findings may motivate initiatives to improve patients' understanding of their imaging examinations, enhancing patient empowerment and contributing to patient-centered care.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency and characteristics of recommendations for additional imaging and/or intervention (RAIs) in abdominal CT and MRI interpretations that might be avoided through comprehensive comparison with all available prior examinations. METHODS: A total of 1,006 RAIs in abdominopelvic CT and MRI reports were retrospectively evaluated. Reports and images from each patient's prior imaging examinations, including those of all relevant body parts and modalities, were reviewed to determine if the RAI could have been avoided based on prior imaging. Frequency and characteristics of such "avoidable" RAIs were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 41 of 1,006 (4.1%) RAIs were avoidable. The key prior examination that established the RAI as avoidable was a different modality in 53.7% (22 of 41) and on a different body area in 41.5% (17 of 41) of cases, including chest imaging in 31.7% (13 of 41). A total of 83.3% (5 of 6) adrenal RAIs, and 80.0% (4 of 5) liver RAIs were avoidable based on prior chest imaging. The key finding was present on the prior images but was not described in the report in 46.3% (19 of 41) of cases. A greater number of prior examinations were available in cases of avoidable RAIs (mean, 12.2 +/- 16.7) than in those of nonavoidable RAIs (mean, 5.7 +/- 9.5) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A small fraction of RAIs can be avoided by performing a thorough evaluation of all prior imaging examinations, including different modalities and body parts. Nearly half of the key prior examinations did not report the finding, highlighting the importance of directly reviewing relevant images, particularly chest imaging for evaluation of indeterminate upper-abdominal findings. Configuration of PACS for optimized selection and display of relevant examination reports and images may facilitate such comparisons.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare coregistration of the bladder wall, bladder masses, and pelvic lymph nodes between sequential and simultaneous PET and MRI acquisitions obtained during hybrid F-FDG PET/MRI performed using a diuresis protocol in bladder cancer patients. METHODS: Six bladder cancer patients underwent F-FDG hybrid PET/MRI, including IV Lasix administration and oral hydration, before imaging to achieve bladder clearance. Axial T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) was obtained approximately 40 minutes before PET ("sequential") and concurrently with PET ("simultaneous"). Three-dimensional spatial coordinates of the bladder wall, bladder masses, and pelvic lymph nodes were recorded for PET and T2WI. Distances between these locations on PET and T2WI sequences were computed and used to compare in-plane (x-y plane) and through-plane (z-axis) misregistration relative to PET between T2WI acquisitions. RESULTS: The bladder increased in volume between T2WI acquisitions (sequential, 176 [139]mL; simultaneous, 255 [146]mL). Four patients exhibited a bladder mass, all with increased activity (SUV, 9.5-38.4). Seven pelvic lymph nodes in 4 patients showed increased activity (SUV, 2.2-9.9). The bladder wall exhibited substantially less misregistration relative to PET for simultaneous, compared with sequential, acquisitions in in-plane (2.8 [3.1]mm vs 7.4 [9.1]mm) and through-plane (1.7 [2.2]mm vs 5.7 [9.6]mm) dimensions. Bladder masses exhibited slightly decreased misregistration for simultaneous, compared with sequential, acquisitions in in-plane (2.2 [1.4]mm vs 2.6 [1.9]mm) and through-plane (0.0 [0.0]mm vs 0.3 [0.8]mm) dimensions. FDG-avid lymph nodes exhibited slightly decreased in-plane misregistration (1.1 [0.8]mm vs 2.5 [0.6]mm), although identical through-plane misregistration (4.0 [1.9]mm vs 4.0 [2.8]mm). CONCLUSIONS: Using hybrid PET/MRI, simultaneous imaging substantially improved bladder wall coregistration and slightly improved coregistration of bladder masses and pelvic lymph nodes.

The contemporary management of prostate cancer (PCa) has been criticized as fostering overdetection and overtreatment of indolent disease. In particular, the historical inability to identify those men with an elevated PSA who truly warrant biopsy, and, for those needing biopsy, to localize aggressive tumors within the prostate, has contributed to suboptimal diagnosis and treatment strategies. This article describes how modern multi-parametric MRI of the prostate addresses such challenges and reduces both overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The central role of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in contributing to MRI's current impact is described. Prostate MRI incorporating DWI achieves higher sensitivity than standard systematic biopsy for intermediate-to-high risk tumor, while having lower sensitivity for low-grade tumors that are unlikely to impact longevity. Particular applications of prostate MRI that are explored include selection of a subset of men with clinical suspicion of PCa to undergo biopsy as well as reliable confirmation of only low-risk disease in active surveillance patients. Various challenges to redefining the standard of care to incorporate solely MRI-targeted cores, without concomitant standard systematic cores, are identified. These include needs for further technical optimization of current systems for performing MRI-targeted biopsies, enhanced education and expertise in prostate MRI among radiologists, greater standardization in prostate MRI reporting across centers, and recognition of the roles of pre-biopsy MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy by payers. Ultimately, it is hoped that the medical community in the United States will embrace prostate MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy, allowing all patients with known or suspected prostate cancer to benefit from this approach.

OBJECTIVE: Prostate tumors occasionally have unusual manifestations on multiparametric MR images that can present a diagnostic dilemma and result in a false-negative interpretation. This article presents examples of such "hiding places" of prostate tumors, four in the peripheral zone and four in the central gland. CONCLUSION: The provided pointers in multiparametric MRI assessment can aid the radiologist in achieving an accurate diagnosis of tumor in the eight scenarios described.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim in this study was to evaluate the effect of the radiologist, technologist, and other examination-related factors on the frequency of recommendations for additional imaging (RAI) during sonographic (US) interpretation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 719 US reports from a single academic medical center for the presence of RAI. All studies had been interpreted by one of three abdominal radiologists. Examinations were performed at an outpatient radiology facility with no onsite radiologist (n = 299) or at an inpatient emergency department or hospital-based outpatient setting that had an onsite radiologist (n = 420). Possible associations between the frequency of RAI and the presence of an onsite radiologist, location of the examination, body part or region imaged, patient age, technologist performing the exam, and radiologist reading the exam were evaluated. RESULTS: There were significant differences between each pair of radiologists in terms of overall frequency of RAI (p < 0.001) (radiologist 1: 12.0% [22/184]; radiologist 2: 21.6% [78/361]; and radiologist 3: 45.5% [79/174]). In addition, there were statistically significant differences in the frequency of RAI among studies scanned by the 10 different US technologists (13.6%-40.0%, p = 0.03). However, other factors such as patient age, patient sex, US unit, patient location, and radiologist location were not associated with the frequency of RAI (p = 0.15-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: The individual radiologist and technologist influenced the frequency of RAI for US examinations, whereas other examination-related factors did not. The observed substantial variability in RAI between radiologists and technologists warrants further study, with consideration of strategies to optimize RAI within US reports. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound, 2015.

PURPOSE: To determine the echo times that provide the greatest precision in measurements of prostate T2 s. T2 relaxation time measurements in the prostate are complicated by the structure of prostate tissue, which consists of fluid-filled glands surrounded by epithelial and stromal cells. Since the glands are large relative to diffusion distances, there is little water exchange between the two compartments and T2 s are biexponential. Because the relative size and characteristics of the two compartments change in prostate tumors, accurate measurement of the characteristics of each may provide useful information on tumor grade. MATERIALS AND METHODS: T2 s were measured in a group of 25 men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer. Subjects were scanned at 3T with a 16-echo turbo-spin echo T2 -mapping sequence. Normal prostate T2 s were measured in areas showing no disease. Optimum echo times for measurement of normal prostate T2 s were found by calculating the covariance matrix, which provides estimates of parameter variance. Echo times that minimize T2 variance were then found by searching over grids of different echo times. Optima for four to eight echo acquisitions were found. Optima were tested by Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: Fast and slow T2 s were 60 msec and 360 msec, respectively. The fast signal fraction was 0.6. Optimum echo times were between 0 and 780 msec, depending on the number of echoes acquired. CONCLUSION: Use of optimum echo times can substantially improve the precision of biexponential T2 measurements. This optimization is anticipated to improve prostate cancer characterization using T2 measurements. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2015.

PURPOSE: To compare boundaries of prostate tumors on MRI and histologic assessment from radical prostatectomy (RP) using detailed software-assisted co-registration, in order to define an optimal treatment margin to achieve complete tumor destruction during image-guided focal ablation. METHODS: 33 patients who underwent 3T MRI before RP were included. A radiologist traced lesion borders on MRI and assigned a suspicion score (SS) from 2-5. 3D reconstructions were created from high-resolution digitalized slides from RP specimens and co-registered to MRI using advanced software. Tumors were compared between histology and MRI using the Hausdorff Distance (HD) and stratified by MRI-SS, Gleason Score (GS), and lesion diameter. Cylindrical volume estimates of treatment effects were used to define the optimal treatment margin. RESULTS: 46 histologically confirmed cancers underwent 3D software-based registration with MRI. MRI underestimated tumor sizes, with the maximal discrepancy between MRI and histologic boundaries for a given tumor averaging 1.99+/-3.1mm (18.5% of the MRI diameter). Boundary underestimation was larger for MRI-SS>/=4 lesions (+3.49+/-2.1mm; p<0.001) and GS>/=7 lesions (+2.48+/-2.8mm; p 0.035). On average, a simulated cylindrical treatment volume based on the MRI boundary missed 14.8% of the tumor volume compared with a simulated cylindrical volume based on the histologic boundary. A simulated treatment volume based on a 9mm treatment margin achieved complete histologic tumor destruction in 100% of patients. CONCLUSION: MRI underestimates histologically-determined tumor boundaries, especially for high MRI-SS and high GS lesions. A 9mm treatment margin around an MRI-visible lesion consistently ensures treatment of the entire histologic tumor volume during focal ablative therapy.