Search

Introduction: There is no clear evidence regarding the benefit of restaging for distant metastases after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RTX) in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the extremities and trunk wall. This study aimed to determine how often restaging of the chest identified metastatic disease that altered management in these patients., Methods: We performed a single-centre retrospective study from 2010 to 2020. All patients with non-metastatic STS of the extremities and trunk wall who were treated with neoadjuvant RTX and received a staging and restaging chest CT scan or X-ray for distant metastasis were included. The outcome of interest was change in treatment strategy due to restaging after neoadjuvant RTX., Results: Within the 144 patients who were staged and treated with neoadjuvant RTX, a restaging chest CT or X-ray was performed in 134 patients (93%). A change in treatment strategy due to new findings at restaging after RTX was observed in 26 out of 134 patients (19%). In 24 patients the scheduled resection of the primary STS was cancelled at restaging (24/134, 18%), given the findings at restaging. The other two patients did receive the intended local resection, but either with palliative intent, or as a part of a previously unplanned multimodality treatment., Conclusion: In approximately one in five patients restaging results in a change in treatment strategy. This underlines the added value of routine restaging for distant metastases with chest CT or X-ray after neoadjuvant RTX in patients with STS., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Value-Based Healthcare (VBH) concept is designed to improve individual healthcare outcomes without increasing expenditure, and is increasingly being used to determine resourcing of and reimbursement for medical services. Radiology is a major contributor to patient and societal healthcare at many levels. Despite this, some VBH models do not acknowledge radiology's central role; this may have future negative consequences for resource allocation., Methods, Findings and Interpretation: This multi-society paper, representing the views of Radiology Societies in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, describes the place of radiology in VBH models and the health-care value contributions of radiology. Potential steps to objectify and quantify the value contributed by radiology to healthcare are outlined., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to explore what terms are used to describe adrenal incidentalomas and to determine what reporting factors are associated with clinicians adhering to international guidelines., Methods: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board, with a waiver of informed consent. Adrenal incidentaloma cases were identified from CT reports between 2010 and 2012 and filtered based on terminology used to describe the adrenal mass at initial presentation. Cases were divided into two groups: masses described with specific terms (ie, nodule, presumably ≥1 cm in diameter) and nonspecific terms (ie, plump, likely to be smaller). P values were calculated using Student's t test and χ 2 test. Rate of adherence of clinicians to workup guidelines was determined for both groups and was analyzed., Results: Of 1,112 cases, 604 had a specific description of the adrenal mass. Patients of the specific group had a significantly larger mass (P < .01) and referral frequency was higher (P < .01). Of the nonspecific masses, 99.2% (504 of 508) were ≥1 cm in diameter, compared with 98.3% of the specific masses (594 of 604). Furthermore, diagnostic workup was more likely to occur when a specific term was used; when Houndsfield unit, size of the mass, and diagnostic recommendation were reported; and when adrenal incidentaloma findings were repeated in the conclusion of the report (all P < .01)., Conclusion: Our study shows that inconsistent use of terms in radiology reports has to be avoided to increase adequate adrenal incidentaloma workup. A structured and thorough report with use of standardized terminology may increase adherence to international guidelines., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Usually, physicians base their practice on guidelines, but recommendations on the same topic may vary across guidelines. Given the uncertainties regarding abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening, physicians should be able to identify systematically and transparently developed recommendations. We performed a systematic review of AAA screening guidelines to assist physicians in their choice of recommendations., Methods: Guidelines in English published between January 1, 2003 and February 26, 2010 were retrieved using MEDLINE, CINAHL, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, the National Library for Health, the Canadian Medication Association Infobase, and the G-I-N International Guideline Library. Guidelines developed by national and international medical societies from Western countries, containing recommendations on AAA screening were included. Three reviewers independently assessed rigor of guideline development using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Two independent reviewers performed extraction of recommendations., Results: Of 2415 titles identified, seven guidelines were included in this review. Three guidelines were less rigorously developed based on AGREE scores below 40%. All seven guidelines contained a recommendation for one-time screening of elderly men by ultrasonography to select AAAs ≥ 5.5 cm for elective surgical repair. Four guidelines, of which three were less rigorously developed, contained disparate recommendations on screening of women and middle-aged men at elevated risk. There was no agreement on the management of smaller AAAs., Conclusions: Consensus exists across guidelines on one-time screening of elderly men to detect and treat AAAs ≥ 5.5 cm. For other target groups and management of small AAAs, prediction models and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to provide guidance., (Copyright © 2012 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To validate the Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS) in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) treated with endovascular repair or open surgery and to update the GAS so that it predicts 30-day mortality for patients with ruptured AAA treated with endovascular repair or open surgery., Methods: In a multicenter prospective observational study, 233 consecutive patients with ruptured AAAs were evaluated; 32 patients did not survive to repair and statistical analysis was performed using collected data on 201 patients. All patients who were treated with endovascular repair (n = 58) or open surgery (n = 143) were included. The GAS was calculated for each patient. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was used to indicate discriminative ability. We tested for interactions between risk factors and the procedure performed. The GAS was updated to predict 30-day mortality after endovascular repair or open surgery in patients with ruptured AAAs using logistic regression analysis., Results: Thirty-day mortality was 15/58 (26%) for patients treated with endovascular repair and 57/143 (40%) for patients treated with open surgery (P = .06). The AUC for GAS was 0.69. No relevant interactions were found. The updated prediction rule (AUC = 0.70) can be calculated with the following formula: + 7 for open surgery + age in years + 17 for shock + 7 for myocardial disease + 10 for cerebrovascular disease + 14 for renal insufficiency., Conclusion: We showed limited discriminative ability of the GAS and therefore updated the GAS by adding the type of procedure performed. This updated prediction rule predicts 30-day mortality for patients with ruptured AAAs treated with endovascular repair or open surgery.

Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of treatment after endovascular repair and open surgery in patients with ruptured infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), including 1-year follow-up., Methods: All consecutive conscious patients with ruptured infrarenal AAAs who presented to our tertiary care teaching hospital between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2005, were included in this study (n = 55). Twenty-six patients underwent endovascular repair, and 29 patients underwent open surgery. Patients who were hemodynamically too unstable to undergo a computed tomography angiography scan were excluded. Outcomes evaluated were intraoperative mortality, 30-day mortality, systemic complications, complications necessitating surgical intervention, and mortality and complications during 1-year follow-up. The statistical tests we used were the Student t test, chi2 test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test (two sided; alpha = .05)., Results: Thirty-day mortality was 8 (31%) of 26 patients who underwent endovascular repair and 9 (31%) of 29 patients who underwent open surgery (P = .98). Systemic complications and complications necessitating surgical intervention during the initial hospital stay were similar in both treatment groups (8/26 [31%] and 5/26 [19%] for endovascular repair, respectively, and 9/29 [31%] and 8/29 [28%] for open surgery, respectively; P > .40). During 1-year follow-up, two patients initially treated with endovascular repair died as a result of non-aneurysm-related causes; no death occurred in the open surgery group. Complications during 1-year follow-up were 1 (5%) of 20 for endovascular repair and 4 (16%) of 25 for open surgery (P = .36)., Conclusions: On the basis of our study with a highly selected population, the mortality and complication rates after endovascular repair may be similar compared with those after open surgery in patients treated for ruptured infrarenal AAAs.