24 results on '"Luttrull, Michael D"'
Search Results
2. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Mental Status Change, Delirium, and New Onset Psychosis
- Author
-
Luttrull, Michael D., Boulter, Daniel J., Kirsch, Claudia F.E., Aulino, Joseph M., Broder, Joshua S., Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F., Ducruet, Andrew F., Kendi, A. Tuba, Lee, Ryan K., Liebeskind, David S., Mack, William, Moritani, Toshio, Roca, Robert P., Shah, Lubdha M., Sharma, Aseem, Shih, Robert Y., Symko, Sophia C., and Bykowski, Julie
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Cervical Neck Pain or Cervical Radiculopathy
- Author
-
McDonald, Marin A., Kirsch, Claudia F.E., Amin, Beejal Y., Aulino, Joseph M., Bell, Angela M., Cassidy, R. Carter, Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F., Gemme, Seth, Lee, Ryan K., Luttrull, Michael D., Metter, Darlene F., Moritani, Toshio, Reitman, Charles, Shah, Lubdha M., Sharma, Aseem, Shih, Robert Y., Snyder, Laura A., Symko, Sophia C., Thiele, Ralf, and Bykowski, Julie
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. A Pilot Study: Free Flap Atrophy in Tongue Reconstruction Using 3D Volumetric Analysis.
- Author
-
Gewirtz, Jordan I., Zhao, Songzhu, Brock, Guy, Luttrull, Michael D., Sethuraman, Shruthi, Kang, Stephen Y., VanKoevering, Kyle K., and Seim, Nolan B.
- Subjects
TONGUE surgery ,PILOT projects ,STATISTICS ,FOREARM ,OBESITY ,SURGICAL flaps ,THREE-dimensional imaging ,CROSS-sectional method ,PLASTIC surgery ,VOLUMETRIC analysis ,THIGH ,POSTOPERATIVE care ,ATROPHY ,RISK assessment ,DESCRIPTIVE statistics ,RESEARCH funding ,MEDICAL artifacts ,GLOSSECTOMY ,ADIPOSE tissues - Abstract
Objective: To identify factors influencing volume change in non-osseous oral free flap reconstruction using postoperative cross-sectional imaging and 3-dimensional segmentation of the free flap's muscular and adipose tissue content. Methods: Oral tongue free flap reconstruction cases (2014-2019) were reviewed with inclusion of patients with 3 postoperative, cross-sectional imaging studies with 1 within 6 months, 1 within 1 year, and 1 that spanned 2 years post-reconstruction. Exclusion criteria included recurrence, significant dental artifact, bony reconstruction, and flap failure. Demographics, risk factors, and surgical/clinical treatments were identified. Flap volumes were measured using Materialise MIMICS. Results: Twenty-two patients met strict inclusion criteria. Four flaps were anterolateral thighs and 18 radial forearms. Median percent volume loss greater than 2 years post-reconstruction was 53.2% overall, 58.1% for radial forearms, and 45.4% for ALTs (21.4% for adipose tissue and 57.4% for muscular tissue). Univariate analysis revealed glossectomy amount was associated with percent volume loss (P =.0417). Each successive postoperative month, the flap decreased by 1.54% (P <.0001). Checking for the interaction effect, the percent of flap loss across time was different for glossectomy amount (P =.0093), obesity status (P =.0431), and base of tongue involvement (P =.0472). Conclusion: Glossectomy type, and thus flap size, is a positive predictor for flap atrophy. Obesity and base of tongue involvement are negative predictors for flap atrophy. The amount of tissue loss may differ from classical teachings with median atrophy 53.2% greater than 2 years post-reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. A Pilot Study: Free Flap Atrophy in Tongue Reconstruction Using 3D Volumetric Analysis
- Author
-
Gewirtz, Jordan I., primary, Zhao, Songzhu, additional, Brock, Guy, additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Sethuraman, Shruthi, additional, Kang, Stephen Y., additional, VanKoevering, Kyle K., additional, and Seim, Nolan B., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Head Trauma
- Author
-
Shetty, Vilaas S., Reis, Martin N., Aulino, Joseph M., Berger, Kevin L., Broder, Joshua, Choudhri, Asim F., Kendi, A. Tuba, Kessler, Marcus M., Kirsch, Claudia F., Luttrull, Michael D., Mechtler, Laszlo L., Prall, J. Adair, Raksin, Patricia B., Roth, Christopher J., Sharma, Aseem, West, O. Clark, Wintermark, Max, Cornelius, Rebecca S., and Bykowski, Julie
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Myelopathy
- Author
-
Roth, Christopher J., Angevine, Peter D., Aulino, Joseph M., Berger, Kevin L., Choudhri, Asim F., Fries, Ian Blair, Holly, Langston T., Kendi, Ayse Tuba Karaqulle, Kessler, Marcus M., Kirsch, Claudia F., Luttrull, Michael D., Mechtler, Laszlo L., O’Toole, John E., Sharma, Aseem, Shetty, Vilaas S., West, O. Clark, Cornelius, Rebecca S., and Bykowski, Julie
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. Sella Turcica and Pituitary Gland
- Author
-
Velayudhan, Vinodkumar, primary, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, and Naidich, Thomas P., additional
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. Contributors
- Author
-
Aggarwal, Amit, primary, Aida, Noriko, additional, Aviv, Richard Ivan, additional, Awobuluyi, Marc Taiwo, additional, Bitar, Richard, additional, Bluestone, Avraham Y., additional, Bou-Haidar, Pascal, additional, Bronen, Richard A., additional, Butowski, Nicholas, additional, Carmody, Raymond Francis, additional, Carpenter, David M., additional, Castillo, Mauricio, additional, Cha, Soonmee, additional, Delman, Bradley N., additional, Doshi, Amish H., additional, Emanuel, Patrick O., additional, Figueroa, Ramón E., additional, Fowkes, Mary Elizabeth, additional, Fox, Allan J., additional, Galper, Merav W., additional, Geibprasert, Sasikhan, additional, Greenberg, Edward D., additional, Hess, Christopher Paul, additional, Huang, Benjamin Y., additional, Jiarakongmun, Pakorn, additional, Jones, Blaise V., additional, Jou, Austin D., additional, Kim, Jane J., additional, Kleinman, George M., additional, Kollias, Spyros, additional, Krayenbühl, Niklaus, additional, Krings, Timo, additional, Lasjaunias, Pierre L., additional, Lee, Benjamin C., additional, Lento, Patrick A., additional, Létourneau-Guillon, Laurent, additional, Linn, Jennifer, additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Massey, Luke A., additional, Montalban, Xavier, additional, Mukherjee, Pratik, additional, Murphy, Frances M., additional, Naidich, Thomas P., additional, Ng, Johnny C., additional, Nimchinsky, Esther A., additional, Nishimura, Gen, additional, Niwa, Tetsu, additional, Ortiz, A. Orlando, additional, Parag, Yoav, additional, Parker, Ellen E., additional, Pasik, Pedro, additional, Patel, Aman B., additional, Pawha, Puneet S., additional, Pereira, Vitor M., additional, Pongpech, Sirintara, additional, Purcell, Derk D., additional, Rees, John H., additional, Ridha, Basil H., additional, Rios, Jose C., additional, Ritter, John L., additional, Rollins, Nancy K., additional, Rosenbloom, Lorne, additional, Rovira, Alex, additional, Smethurst, Mark E., additional, Smirniotopoulos, James G., additional, Smith, Alice B., additional, Stein, Evan G., additional, Steinberger, Jonathan D., additional, Symons, Sean P., additional, Tang, Cheuk Ying, additional, Thurnher, Majda M, additional, Toh, Cheng Hong, additional, Velayudhan, Vinodkumar, additional, Waselus, John D., additional, Yeung, Robert, additional, Yousry, Tarek A., additional, and Zimmerman, Robert D., additional
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Hearing Loss and/or Vertigo
- Author
-
Sharma, Aseem, primary, Kirsch, Claudia F.E., additional, Aulino, Joseph M., additional, Chakraborty, Santanu, additional, Choudhri, Asim F., additional, Germano, Isabelle M., additional, Kendi, A. Tuba, additional, Kim, H. Jeffrey, additional, Lee, Ryan K., additional, Liebeskind, David S., additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Moritani, Toshio, additional, Murad, Gregory J.A., additional, Shah, Lubdha M., additional, Shih, Robert Y., additional, Symko, Sophia C., additional, and Bykowski, Julie, additional
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. Emerging Trends in Emergent Stroke Neuroimaging
- Author
-
Drocton, Gerald T., primary, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Ajam, Amna A., additional, and Nguyen, Xuan V., additional
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Sinonasal Disease
- Author
-
Kirsch, Claudia F.E., primary, Bykowski, Julie, additional, Aulino, Joseph M., additional, Berger, Kevin L., additional, Choudhri, Asim F., additional, Conley, David B., additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Nunez, Diego, additional, Shah, Lubdha M., additional, Sharma, Aseem, additional, Shetty, Vilaas S., additional, Subramaniam, Rathan M., additional, Symko, Sophia C., additional, and Cornelius, Rebecca S., additional
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Tinnitus
- Author
-
Kessler, Marcus M., primary, Moussa, Marwan, additional, Bykowski, Julie, additional, Kirsch, Claudia F.E., additional, Aulino, Joseph M., additional, Berger, Kevin L., additional, Choudhri, Asim F., additional, Fife, Terry D., additional, Germano, Isabelle M., additional, Kendi, A. Tuba, additional, Kim, Jeffrey H., additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Nunez, Diego, additional, Shah, Lubdha M., additional, Sharma, Aseem, additional, Shetty, Vilaas S., additional, Symko, Sophia C., additional, and Cornelius, Rebecca S., additional
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
14. CAPÍTULO 14 - Sela Túrcica e Hipófise
- Author
-
Velayudhan, Vinodkumar, Luttrull, Michael D., and Naidich, Thomas P.
- Published
- 2015
15. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Plexopathy
- Author
-
Bykowski, Julie, primary, Aulino, Joseph M., additional, Berger, Kevin L., additional, Cassidy, R. Carter, additional, Choudhri, Asim F., additional, Kendi, A. Tuba, additional, Kirsch, Claudia F.E., additional, Luttrull, Michael D., additional, Sharma, Aseem, additional, Shetty, Vilaas S., additional, Than, Khoi, additional, Winfree, Christopher J., additional, and Cornelius, Rebecca S., additional
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
16. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Cervical Neck Pain or Cervical Radiculopathy.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurological Imaging:, McDonald, Marin A, Kirsch, Claudia F E, Amin, Beejal Y, Aulino, Joseph M, Bell, Angela M, Cassidy, R Carter, Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F, Gemme, Seth, Lee, Ryan K, Luttrull, Michael D, Metter, Darlene F, Moritani, Toshio, Reitman, Charles, Shah, Lubdha M, Sharma, Aseem, Shih, Robert Y, Snyder, Laura A, and Symko, Sophia C
- Abstract
Nontraumatic neck pain is a leading cause of disability, with nearly 50% of individuals experiencing ongoing or recurrent symptoms. Radiographs are appropriate as initial imaging for cervical or neck pain in the absence of "red flag" symptoms or if there are unchanging chronic symptoms; however, spondylotic changes are commonly identified and may result in both false-positive and false-negative findings. Noncontrast CT can be complementary to radiographs for evaluation of new or changing symptoms in the setting of prior cervical spine surgery or in the assessment of extent of ossification in the posterior longitudinal ligament. Noncontrast MRI is usually appropriate for assessment of new or increasing radiculopathy due to improved nerve root definition. MRI without and with contrast is usually appropriate in patients with new or increasing cervical or neck pain or radiculopathy in the setting of suspected infection or known malignancy. Imaging may be appropriate; however, it is not always indicated for evaluation of cervicogenic headache without neurologic deficit. 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]
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
17. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Acute Mental Status Change, Delirium, and New Onset Psychosis.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurological Imaging:, Luttrull, Michael D, Boulter, Daniel J, Kirsch, Claudia F E, Aulino, Joseph M, Broder, Joshua S, Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F, Ducruet, Andrew F, Kendi, A Tuba, Lee, Ryan K, Liebeskind, David S, Mack, William, Moritani, Toshio, Roca, Robert P, Shah, Lubdha M, Sharma, Aseem, Shih, Robert Y, Symko, Sophia C, and Bykowski, Julie
- Abstract
Acute changes in mental status represent a broad collection of symptoms used to describe disorders in mentation and level of arousal, including the more narrowly defined diagnoses of delirium and psychosis. A wide range of precipitating factors may be responsible for symptom onset including infection, intoxication, and metabolic disorders. Neurologic causes that may be detected on neuroimaging include stroke, traumatic brain injury, nonconvulsive seizure, central nervous system infection, tumors, hydrocephalus, and inflammatory disorders. Not infrequently, two or more precipitating factors may be found. Neuroimaging with CT or MRI is usually appropriate if the clinical suspicion for an acute neurological cause is high, where the cause of symptoms is not found on initial assessment, and for patients whose symptoms do not respond appropriately to management. There was disagreement regarding the appropriateness of neuroimaging in cases where a suspected, nonneurologic cause is found on initial assessment. Neuroimaging with CT is usually appropriate for patients presenting with delirium, although the yield may be low in the absence of trauma or a focal neurological deficit. Neuroimaging with CT or MRI may be appropriate in the evaluation of new onset psychosis, although the yield may be low in the absence of a neurologic deficit. 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]
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
18. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Neck Mass-Adenopathy.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, Aulino, Joseph M, Kirsch, Claudia F E, Burns, Judah, Busse, Paul M, Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F, Conley, David B, Jones, Christopher U, Lee, Ryan K, Luttrull, Michael D, Moritani, Toshio, Policeni, Bruno, Ryan, Maura E, Shah, Lubdha M, Sharma, Aseem, Shih, Robert Y, Subramaniam, Rathan M, Symko, Sophia C, and Bykowski, Julie
- Abstract
A palpable neck mass may be the result of neoplastic, congenital, or inflammatory disease. Older age suggests neoplasia, and a congenital etiology is more prevalent in the pediatric population. The imaging approach is based on the patient age, mass location, and clinical pulsatility. Underlying human papillomavirus-related malignancy should be considered in all age groups. Although the imaging appearance of some processes in the head and neck overlap, choosing the appropriate imaging examination may allow a specific diagnosis, or a limited differential diagnosis. Tissue sampling is indicated to confirm suspected malignancy. 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]
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
19. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Hearing Loss and/or Vertigo.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, Sharma, Aseem, Kirsch, Claudia F E, Aulino, Joseph M, Chakraborty, Santanu, Choudhri, Asim F, Germano, Isabelle M, Kendi, A Tuba, Kim, H Jeffrey, Lee, Ryan K, Liebeskind, David S, Luttrull, Michael D, Moritani, Toshio, Murad, Gregory J A, Shah, Lubdha M, Shih, Robert Y, Symko, Sophia C, and Bykowski, Julie
- Abstract
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]
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
20. Colaboradores
- Author
-
Aggarwal, Amit, Aida, Noriko, Aviv, Richard Ivan, Awobuluyi, Marc Taiwo, Bitar, Richard, Bluestone, Avraham Y., Bou-Haidar, Pascal, Bronen, Richard A., Butowski, Nicholas, Carmody, Raymond Francis, Carpenter, David M., Castillo, Mauricio, Cha, Soonmee, Delman, Bradley N., Doshi, Amish H., Emanuel, Patrick O., Figueroa, Ramón E., Fowkes, Mary Elizabeth, Fox, Allan J., Galper, Merav W., Geibprasert, Sasikhan, Greenberg, Edward D., Hess, Christopher Paul, Huang, Benjamin Y., Jiarakongmun, Pakorn, Jones, Blaise V., Jou, Austin D., Kim, Jane J., Kleinman, George M., Kollias, Spyros, Krayenbühl, Niklaus, Krings, Timo, Lasjaunias, Pierre L., Lee, Benjamin C., Lento, Patrick A., Guillon, Laurent Létourneau, Linn, Jennifer, Luttrull, Michael D., Massey, Luke A., Montalban, Xavier, Mukherjee, Pratik, Murphy, Frances M., Naidich, Thomas P., Ng, Johnny C., Nimchinsky, Esther A., Nishimura, Gen, Niwa, Tetsu, Ortiz, A. Orlando, Parag, Yoav, Parker, Ellen E., Pasik, Pedro, Patel, Aman B., Pawha, Puneet S., Pereira, Vitor M., Pongpech, Sirintara, Purcell, Derk D., Rees, John H., Ridha, Basil H., Rios, Jose C., Ritter, John L., Rollins, Nancy K., Rosenbloom, Lorne, Rovira, Alex, Smethurst, Mark E., Smirniotopoulos, James G., Smith, Alice B., Stein, Evan G., Steinberger, Jonathan D., Symons, Sean P., Tang, Cheuk Ying, Thurnher, Majda M, Toh, Cheng-Hong, Velayudhan, Vinodkumar, Waselus, John D., Yeung, Robert, Yousry, Tarek A., and Zimmerman, Robert D.
- Published
- 2015
21. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Tinnitus.
- Author
-
Kessler, Marcus M., Moussa, Marwan, Bykowski, Julie, Kirsch, Claudia F.E., Aulino, Joseph M., Berger, Kevin L., Choudhri, Asim F., Fife, Terry D., Germano, Isabelle M., Kendi, A. Tuba, Kim, Jeffrey H., Luttrull, Michael D., Jr.Nunez, Diego, Shah, Lubdha M., Sharma, Aseem, Shetty, Vilaas S., Symko, Sophia C., Cornelius, Rebecca S., Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, and Nunez, Diego Jr
- Abstract
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]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
22. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Sinonasal Disease.
- Author
-
Kirsch, Claudia F.E., Bykowski, Julie, Aulino, Joseph M., Berger, Kevin L., Choudhri, Asim F., Conley, David B., Luttrull, Michael D., Jr.Nunez, Diego, Shah, Lubdha M., Sharma, Aseem, Shetty, Vilaas S., Subramaniam, Rathan M., Symko, Sophia C., Cornelius, Rebecca S., Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, and Nunez, Diego Jr
- Abstract
Imaging of sinonasal pathology may occur for assessment of rhinosinusitis or mass lesions. Rhinosinusitis is prevalent in up to 16% of the US population with annual economic burdens estimated at 22 billion dollars. Rhinosinusitis is characterized as acute or chronic based on symptom duration; if four or more episodes occur annually, the term recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) is used. In acute uncomplicated rhinosinusitis when inflammatory change remains in the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity, imaging may not be required. Distinction between viral or bacterial rhinosinusitis is a clinical diagnosis, and imaging should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical and endoscopic findings. Sinus CT imaging is appropriate per clinical judgment in associated complications including headache, facial pain, swelling, orbital proptosis, or cranial nerve palsies. In maxillary sinusitis, teeth may require assessment because 20% may be odontogenic in origin. MRI may be complementary in aggressive infections with intraocular/intracranial complications, invasive fungal sinusitis, or sinonasal masses. 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]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
23. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Plexopathy.
- Author
-
Bykowski, Julie, Aulino, Joseph M., Berger, Kevin L., Cassidy, R. Carter, Choudhri, Asim F., Kendi, A. Tuba, Kirsch, Claudia F.E., Luttrull, Michael D., Sharma, Aseem, Shetty, Vilaas S., Than, Khoi, Winfree, Christopher J., Cornelius, Rebecca S., and Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:
- Abstract
MRI without and with contrast is the most accurate imaging method to determine whether a process is intrinsic or extrinsic to a nerve of the brachial or lumbosacral plexus. However, there are no Current Procedural Terminology codes to correspond to imaging studies of the brachial or lumbar plexus discretely. This assessment uses "MRI of the brachial plexus" or "MRI of the lumbosacral plexus" as independent entities given that imaging acquisition for the respective plexus differs in sequences and planes compared with those of a routine neck, chest, spine, or pelvic MRI, yet acknowledges the potential variability of ordering practices across institutions. In patients unable to undergo MRI, CT offers the next highest level of anatomic evaluation. In oncologic patients, PET/CT imaging can identify the extent of tumor involvement and be beneficial to differentiate radiation plexitis from tumor recurrence but provides limited resolution of the plexus itself. 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]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
24. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Hearing Loss and/or Vertigo.
- Author
-
Sharma A, Kirsch CFE, Aulino JM, Chakraborty S, Choudhri AF, Germano IM, Kendi AT, Kim HJ, Lee RK, Liebeskind DS, Luttrull MD, Moritani T, Murad GJA, Shah LM, Shih RY, Symko SC, and Bykowski J
- Subjects
- Diagnosis, Differential, Evidence-Based Medicine, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Societies, Medical, United States, Hearing Loss diagnostic imaging, Neuroimaging methods, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Vertigo diagnostic imaging
- Abstract
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., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.