Search

Neuroendocrine dysfunction includes suspected hyper- and hypofunction of the pituitary gland. Causative lesions may include primary masses of the pituitary such as pituitary microadenomas and macroadenomas, as well as extrinsic masses, typically centered in the suprasellar cistern. Clinical syndromes related to hormonal dysfunction can be caused by excessive hormonal secretion or by inhibited secretion due to mass effect upon elements of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. Additionally, complications such as hemorrhage may be seen in the setting of an underlying mass and can result in hormonal dysfunction. MRI with high-resolution protocols is the best first-line test to evaluate the sella turcica and parasellar region. CT provides complementary information regarding bony anatomy, and may be appropriate as a first-line test in certain instances, but it provides less detail and lesion characterization when compared to MRI. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for spinal metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared with other radioresistant histologies (renal cell carcinoma [RCC], melanoma, and sarcoma) in terms of local control (LC) and pain control. Methods and Materials We performed a retrospective review of patients treated with SRS to the spine for metastatic HCC, RCC, melanoma, and sarcoma between January 2007 and May 2014. Radiographic assessments of LC, overall survival, and patient-reported pain control were analyzed as univariable analyses and with various patient- and treatment-related parameters as multivariable analyses (MVA). Results Of the 96 patients treated with SRS, 41 patients had radioresistant histologies, including 18 HCC, 1 mixed HCC and cholangiocarcinoma, 15 RCC, 6 melanoma, and 1 leiomyosarcoma. Extraosseous disease was present in 63% of patients (74% in HCC; 55% in non-HCC; P = not significant). Spinal cord compression was present in 29% of patients (32% in HCC; 27% in non-HCC; P = not significant), and 24% of patients had decompressive surgery before SRS (26% in HCC; 23% in non-HCC; P = not significant). With a median follow-up time of 8.7 months, the actuarial 3-, 6-, and 12-month LC rates were 71%, 61%, 41%, respectively, for HCC, and 94%, 94%, and 85%, respectively, for non-HCC. The median time to local failure was 3 months for HCC and 11 months for non-HCC. On MVA, there was a strong trend toward inferior LC with HCC (P =.059). Of the 28 patients with pretreatment pain, pain relief was achieved in 93% of patients, but the 2 patients who did not experience pain relief both had HCC. The actuarial 3-, 6-, and 12-month pain control rates were 68%, 51%, 17%, respectively, for HCC, and 100%, 89%, and 89%, respectively, for non-HCC (P =.023), and remained significant on MVA (P =.034). Conclusions Compared with other radioresistant histologies, HCC has inferior LC and pain relief after SRS. Whether HCC may benefit from further dose escalation or combined treatment with new therapies is an area of future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents guidelines for imaging utilization in patients presenting with hearing loss or vertigo, symptoms that sometimes occur concurrently due to proximity of receptors and neural pathways responsible for hearing and balance. These guidelines take into account the superiority of CT in providing bony details and better soft-tissue resolution offered by MRI. It should be noted that a dedicated temporal bone CT rather than a head CT best achieves delineation of disease in many of these patients. Similarly, optimal assessment often requires a dedicated high-resolution protocol designed to assess temporal bone and internal auditory canals even though such a study will be requested and billed as a brain MRI. Angiographic techniques are helpful in some patients, especially in the setting of vertigo. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriate imaging modalities for the follow-up of malignant or aggressive musculoskeletal tumors include radiography, MRI, CT, (18)F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET/CT, (99m)Tc bone scan, and ultrasound. Clinical scenarios reviewed include evaluation for metastatic disease to the lung in low- and high-risk patients, for osseous metastatic disease in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, for local recurrence of osseous tumors with and without significant hardware present, and for local recurrence of soft tissue tumors. The timing for follow-up of pulmonary metastasis surveillance is also reviewed. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every three years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most patients presenting with uncomplicated, nontraumatic, primary headache do not require imaging. When history, physical, or neurologic examination elicits "red flags" or critical features of the headache, then further investigation with imaging may be warranted to exclude a secondary cause. Imaging procedures may be diagnostically useful for patients with headaches that are: associated with trauma; new, worse, or abrupt onset; thunderclap; radiating to the neck; due to trigeminal autonomic cephalgia; persistent and positional; and temporal in older individuals. Pregnant patients, immunocompromised individuals, cancer patients, and patients with papilledema or systemic illnesses, including hypercoagulable disorders may benefit from imaging. Unlike most headaches, those associated with cough, exertion, or sexual activity usually require neuroimaging with MRI of the brain with and without contrast to exclude potentially underlying pathology before a primary headache syndrome is diagnosed. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria arc evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriate imaging modalities for screening, staging, and surveillance of patients with suspected and documented metastatic disease to bone include 99mTc bone scanning, MRI, CT, radiography, and 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose–PET. Clinical scenarios reviewed include asymptomatic stage 1 breast carcinoma, symptomatic stage 2 breast carcinoma, abnormal bone scan results with breast carcinoma, pathologic fracture with known metastatic breast carcinoma, asymptomatic well-differentiated and poorly differentiated prostate carcinoma, vertebral fracture with history of malignancy, non-small-cell lung carcinoma staging, symptomatic multiple myeloma, osteosarcoma staging and surveillance, and suspected bone metastasis in a pregnant patient. No single imaging modality is consistently best for the assessment of metastatic bone disease across all tumor types and clinical situations. In some cases, no imaging is indicated. The recommendations contained herein are the result of evidence-based consensus by the ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Expert Panel on Musculoskeletal Radiology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Tinnitus is the perception of sound in the absence of an external source. It is a common symptom that can be related to hearing loss and other benign causes. However, tinnitus may be disabling and can be the only symptom in a patient with a central nervous system process disorder. History and physical examination are crucial first steps to determine the need for imaging. CT and MRI are useful in the setting of pulsatile tinnitus to evaluate for an underlying vascular anomaly or abnormality. If there is concomitant asymmetric hearing loss, neurologic deficit, or head trauma, imaging should be guided by those respective ACR Appropriateness Criteria® documents, rather than the presence of tinnitus. Imaging is not usually appropriate in the evaluation of subjective, nonpulsatile tinnitus that does not localize to one ear. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]