Search

The ultrasound diagnosis imaging report reflects the sum of a radiologist's synthesis and judgement into a patient's condition. It is also an important product that is generated by radiologists to help the patients. In spite of the importance of clear and effective report writing, radiologists usually receive little or no formal reporting education. There are key principles when reporting the ultrasound findings, impression, and recommendations to promote report quality and reading experience. The findings should emphasize short and factual observations while avoiding redundancy. The impression is the thoughtful synthesis of findings leading to a diagnosis, a differential diagnosis and management recommendations. Improved report writing is achieved only after persistent learning, follow up and summaries.

Background and Objectives: Portal hypertension (PH), as the main consequence of cirrhosis, leads to the development of gastroesophageal varices (GEVs). Variceal hemorrhage (VH) caused by the rupture of GEVs is a life-threatening emergency. Thus, the prediction of VH risk is considerably important. Our pilot study aimed to identify the risk factors of variceal hemorrhage (VH) in cirrhosis. Materials and Methods: Cirrhotic patients were prospectively included and divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of VH. Conventional ultrasound and shear wave dispersion (SWD) imaging were conducted to detect the portal vein diameter, spleen diameter, ascites, liver stiffness (LS) and shear wave dispersion slope (SWDS). The laboratory tests were recorded, including platelets (PLT), alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bilirubin (TBIL) and albumin (ALB). The risk factors of VH were screened using univariate analyses and identified using multivariate logistic regression. The ROC curves were used to assess diagnostic accuracy. Comparisons between AUCs were performed using the Delong method. Results: Sixty-five patients with 22 VHs were finally included. The SWDS, spleen diameter and ascites were identified as independent risk factors for VH. The SWDS showed good performance for diagnosing VH (AUC = 0.768, 95% CI: 0.647–0.864), and sensitively identified 95.5% (95% CI: 77.2%–99.9%) of patients with VH. Including the three risk factors in multivariate logistic regression, we obtained a formula for diagnosing VH: −20.749 + 0.804 × SWDS + 0.449 × spleen diameter + 1.803 × ascites (no ascites = 0, ascites = 1). Comparison of AUCs revealed that the formula (AUC = 0.900, 95% CI: 0.800–0.961) performed better than LS, SWDS, and spleen diameter in diagnosing VH (p < 0.001; p < 0.05; p < 0.05). Conclusions: SWDS is a sensitive parameter for assessing the risk of VH. Combining the SWDS, spleen diameter and ascites resulted in good diagnostic accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To validate the feasibility of S-Detect, an ultrasound computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system using deep learning, in enhancing the diagnostic performance of breast ultrasound (US) for patients with opportunistic screening-detected breast lesions. Methods: Nine medical centers throughout China participated in this prospective study. Asymptomatic patients with US-detected breast masses were enrolled and received conventional US, S-Detect, and strain elastography subsequently. The final pathological results are referred to as the gold standard for classifying breast mass. The diagnostic performances of the three methods and the combination of S-Detect and elastography were evaluated and compared, including sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUC) curve. We also compared the diagnostic performances of S-Detect among different study sites. Results: A total of 757 patients were enrolled, including 460 benign and 297 malignant cases. S-Detect exhibited significantly higher AUC and specificity than conventional US (AUC, S-Detect 0.83 [0.80–0.85] vs. US 0.74 [0.70–0.77], p < 0.0001; specificity, S-Detect 74.35% [70.10%–78.28%] vs. US 54.13% [51.42%–60.29%], p < 0.0001), with no decrease in sensitivity. In comparison to that of S-Detect alone, the AUC value significantly was enhanced after combining elastography and S-Detect (0.87 [0.84–0.90]), without compromising specificity (73.93% [68.60%–78.78%]). Significant differences in the S-Detect's performance were also observed across different study sites (AUC of S-Detect in Groups 1–4: 0.89 [0.84–0.93], 0.84 [0.77–0.89], 0.85 [0.76–0.92], 0.75 [0.69–0.80]; p [1 vs. 4] < 0.0001, p [2 vs. 4] = 0.0165, p [3 vs. 4] = 0.0157). Conclusions: Compared with the conventional US, S-Detect presented higher overall accuracy and specificity. After S-Detect and strain elastography were combined, the performance could be further enhanced. The performances of S-Detect also varied among different centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To explore the best individualized systematic prostate biopsy method. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 1211 patients who underwent 12‐core systematic prostate biopsy guided by transrectal ultrasound from January 2011 to March 2018. Other biopsy core methods (6‐, 8‐, and 10‐core) were estimated from the 12‐core biopsy that was performed. Differences in the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) were compared. Results: A total of 498 cases of PCa (41.1%) were detected, and 423 cases (34.9%) were csPCa. There was no significant difference between the 12‐ and 10‐core prostate biopsy strategies in the total detection rates of PCa and csPCa (P > .05). In the subgroup of patients with a maximal prostate cross‐sectional area of less than 15 cm2, there was a significant difference between the 12‐core method and the standard 6‐core method (P = .03) but no significant differences between the other methods in the detection rate of PCa (P > .05), but in the detection rate of csPCa, the 12‐core method differed significantly from the other methods (P = .02–.04) except for the 10‐core method (P > .05). In patients with a prostate‐specific antigen concentration of 20 ng/mL or higher, there were no significant differences between the 12‐core method and all of the other methods (P > 0.05). In patients younger than 70 years and 70 years or older, the 12‐core method differed significantly from the other methods (P < .01–.03) except for the 10‐core method (P > .05). Conclusions: Ten‐ or 12‐core biopsy showed a higher detection rate than the other schemes. However, for patients with a prostate‐specific antigen concentration of 20 ng/mL or higher, the 6‐core systematic biopsy is preferred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the diagnostic performance of qualitative and quantitative ultrasound criteria for anterosuperior acetabular labral tears (ALTs). In all, 118 people with ALTs (120 hips; case group) and 31 asymptomatic volunteers (42 hips; control group) at Peking University Third Hospital between August 2018 and November 2019 were consecutively included. The labral cleft, labral heterogeneous echogenicity, labral plump morphology, paralabral cyst and labral focal hyperechoic area were used as the qualitative criteria. The anterosuperior labral cross-section area (CSA) was measured as the quantitative criterion. The diagnostic utility of the quantitative and qualitative criteria were explored with magnetic resonance imaging as the diagnostic gold standard. Labral heterogeneous echogenicity was the most sensitive criterion for diagnosing ALTs (up to 80.00%), and the specificity of diagnosing ALTs with paralabral cysts, labral focal hyperechoic area and subcortical cysts of the femoral head and neck was as high as 90.48%-100%. The labral CSA in the case group was 0.27 cm2 (0.21-0.39 cm2), which was significantly larger compared with the control group (0.18 cm2 [0.14-0.23 cm2]; p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.802 for diagnosing ALTs according to the labral CSA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of the combined qualitative criteria for diagnosing ALTs were 90.00%, 71.43%, 90.00%, 71.43% and 85.19%, respectively. Labral heterogeneous echogenicity is a sensitive criterion for diagnosing ALTs, and paralabral cysts, labral focal hyperechoic, area and subcortical cysts of the femoral head and neck are specific criteria. The CSA of the anterosuperior acetabular labrum measured by ultrasound can be used as a quantitative criterion to diagnose ALTs. The combination of labral qualitative criteria provides higher sensitivity and accuracy in diagnosing ALTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Ultrasound Physician Branch of the Chinese Medical Doctor Association sought to develop evidence-based recommendations on the operational standards for 2-D shear wave elastography examination of musculoskeletal tissues. A consensus panel of 22 Chinese musculoskeletal ultrasound experts reviewed current scientific evidence and proposed a set of 12 recommendations for 13 key issues, including instruments, operating methods, influencing factors and image interpretation. A final consensus was reached through discussion and voting. On the basis of research evidence and expert opinions, the strength of recommendation for each proposition was assessed using a visual analog scale, while further emphasizing the best available evidence during the question-and-answer session. These expert consensus guidelines encourage facilitation of the standardization of clinical practices for collecting and reporting shear wave elastography data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]