Search

Objectives: Determine the rate of positive extremity ultrasound exams for DVT in patients with COVID‐19 and assess for differences in laboratory values in patients with and without DVT, which could be used as a surrogate to decide the need for further evaluation with ultrasound. Methods: Retrospective case control study with 1:2 matching of cases (COVID‐19+ patients) to controls (COVID‐19− patients) based on age, gender, and race. Laboratory values assessed were serum D‐dimer, fibrinogen, prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, and C‐reactive protein. Demographic variables, comorbidities, and clinical variables including final disposition were also evaluated. P‐values for categorical variables were calculated with the chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test. P‐values for continuous variables were compared with the use of a two‐tailed unpaired t‐test. Results: The rate of extremity ultrasound exams positive for DVT were similar in patients with (14.7%) and without (19.3%) COVID‐19 (P =.423). No significant difference was observed in laboratory values including the D‐dimer level in COVID‐19 patients without (mean 9523.9 ng/mL (range 339 to >60,000)) or with DVT (mean 13,663.7 ng/mL (range 1193–>60,000)) (P =.475). No differences were found in demographic variabilities or co‐morbidities among COVID‐19 patients with and without extremity DVT. Conclusions: We found no statistically significant difference in rate of positive DVT studies between COVID‐19+ and COVID‐19− patients. D‐dimer levels are elevated, in some cases markedly, in COVID‐19 patients with and without DVTs and therefore these data do not support their use as a surrogate when assessing the need for ultrasound evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renal masses are increasingly detected in asymptomatic individuals as incidental findings. CT and MRI with intravenous contrast and a dedicated multiphase protocol are the mainstays of evaluation for indeterminate renal masses. A single-phase postcontrast dual-energy CT can be useful when a dedicated multiphase renal protocol CT is not available. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound with microbubble agents is a useful alternative for characterizing renal masses, especially for patients in whom iodinated CT contrast or gadolinium-based MRI contrast is contraindicated. 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]

Hematuria is a common reason for patients to be referred for imaging of the urinary tract. All patients diagnosed with hematuria should undergo a thorough history and physical examination, urinalysis, and serologic testing prior to any initial imaging. Ultrasound, CT, and MRI are the most common imaging modalities used to evaluate hematuria. This document discusses the following clinical scenarios for hematuria: initial imaging of microhematuria without risk factors or history of recent vigorous exercise, or presence of infection, or viral illness, or present or recent menstruation; initial imaging of microhematuria in patients with known risk factors and no history of recent vigorous exercise, or presence of infection, or viral illness, or present or recent menstruation or renal parenchymal disease; initial imaging of microhematuria in the pregnant patient and initial imaging of gross hematuria. Follow-up of normal or abnormal findings is beyond the scope of this review. 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]

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for most malignant renal tumors and is considered the most lethal of all urologic cancers. For follow-up of patients with treated or untreated RCC and those with neoplasms suspected to represent RCC, radiologic imaging is the most useful component of surveillance, as most relapses and cases of disease progression are identified when patients are asymptomatic. Understanding the strengths and limitations of the various imaging modalities for the detection of disease, recurrence, or progression is important when planning follow-up regimens. This publication addresses the appropriate imaging examinations for asymptomatic patients who have been treated for RCC with radical or partial nephrectomy, or ablative therapies. It also discusses the appropriate imaging examinations for asymptomatic patients with localized biopsy-proven or suspected RCC undergoing active surveillance. 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]

Pyelonephritis refers to infection involving the renal parenchyma and renal pelvis. In most patients, uncomplicated pyelonephritis is diagnosed clinically and responds quickly to appropriate antibiotic treatment. If treatment is delayed, the patient is immunocompromised, or for other reasons, microabscesses that form during the acute phase of pyelonephritis may coalesce, forming a renal abscess. Patients with underlying diabetes are more vulnerable to complications, including emphysematous pyelonephritis in addition to abscess formation. Additionally, diabetics may not have the typical flank tenderness that helps to differentiate pyelonephritis from a lower urinary tract infection. Additional high-risk populations may include those with anatomic abnormalities of the urinary tract, vesicoureteral reflux, obstruction, pregnancy, nosocomial infection, or infection by treatment-resistant pathogens. Treatment goals include symptom relief, elimination of infection to avoid renal damage, and identification of predisposing factors to avoid future recurrences. The primary imaging modalities used in patients with pyelonephritis are CT, MRI, and ultrasound. 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]