Search

Purpose: The aim was to reduce outpatient wait time and improve patient experience by optimising oral contrast use . Methods: Our multidisciplinary stakeholder collaboration implemented two simultaneous interventions: (1) Creation of ‘oral contrast policy’, limiting recommended indications. (2) Creation of a new shorter oral contrast regime (30 vs 60 min). We conducted a retrospective service evaluation of oral contrast use in outpatient (OP) abdominal CT at baseline and post-intervention. Patient wait times were measured and per-patient cost-savings were reported. An image quality review was performed by 2 blinded abdominal radiologists. Patient experience was evaluated with a standard voluntary survey. Statistical analysis was performed comparing baseline and evaluation outcomes using Chi-square or Fisher Exact test for categorical variables and Student’s t-test or ANOVA for continuous data. Results: Over 1-month periods, OP CT scans were assessed in baseline (pre-pandemic) n = 575, baseline (pandemic) n = 495 and post-intervention n = 545 groups. Oral contrast use reduced from 420/575, 73.0% at baseline to 178/545, 32.7% post intervention. The turn-around time reduced by 15.8 minutes per patient from 70.3 to 54.5 minutes, P < .001 (Interventions 1 and 2). The diagnostic quality did not differ between the oral contrast regimes (Intervention 2, P = 1.0, P = .08). No repeat CTs were needed due to lack of oral contrast (Intervention 1) or poor opacification (Intervention 2). There was oral contrast cost reductions of 69.1–78.4% ( P < .001). Patients reported their overall experience was improved post-intervention (Interventions 1 and 2). Conclusions: Optimising the CT oral contrast service through judicious use and a shorter regime, reduced patient wait times, improved patient experience and preserved diagnostic quality.

The aim was to compare outcomes in a subgroup of patients with infrapopliteal (IP) disease randomised to infrapopliteal vein bypass (VB) or plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) in the original BASIL trial.A comparison of outcomes from patients randomised to VB or PBA undergoing revascularisation for severe limb ischaemia (SLI) because of IP disease with or without femoropopliteal disease. Data were extracted from case report forms from the BASIL trial. The primary outcome was amputation free survival (AFS); secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), 30 day mortality and morbidity, freedom from arterial re-intervention, immediate technical success, repeat and crossover interventions, length of hospital stay, and quality of revascularisation.A total of 104 patients were identified in the BASIL study with IP disease, 56 randomised to IP VB, and 48 to IP PBA. Groups were similar at baseline except for more chronic kidney disease and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in the VB group, and more previous surgical arterial intervention and antihypertensive use in the PBA group. There were no statistically significant differences in AFS or OS; however, clinically important trends were apparent in favour of a VB first strategy. Patients allocated to VB demonstrated significantly quicker relief of rest pain when compared with PBA (p = .005), but no significant differences in improved tissue healing. Median length of index hospital admission was significantly greater in the VB than in the PBA group (18 vs. 10 days, p .0001) but there was no difference between the two groups in median total hospital stay between randomisation and the primary endpoint (VB 43.5 vs. PBA 42 days).Further randomised trials, like BASIL-2 and BEST-CLI, are required to determine whether patients with severe limb ischaemia who require IP revascularisation and who are suitable for VB should have bypass or endovascular intervention as their primary revascularisation procedure.

Diana Crossley,1 Mary Renton,1 Muhammad Khan,1 Emma V Low,1 Alice M Turner2 1Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; 2Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Background: The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between computed tomography (CT) densitometry and routine clinical markers in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and alpha-1 anti-trypsin deficiency (AATD).Methods: Multiple databases were searched using a combination of pertinent terms and those articles relating quantitatively measured CT densitometry to clinical outcomes. Studies that used visual scoring only were excluded, as were those measured in expiration only. A thorough review of abstracts and full manuscripts was conducted by 2 reviewers; data extraction and assessment of bias was conducted by 1 reviewer and the 4 reviewers independently assessed for quality. Pooled correlation coefficients were calculated, and heterogeneity was explored.Results: A total of 112 studies were identified, 82 being suitable for meta-analysis. The most commonly used density threshold was −950 HU, and a significant association between CT density and all included clinical parameters was demonstrated. There was marked heterogeneity between studies secondary to large variety of disease severity within commonly included cohorts and differences in CT acquisition parameters.Conclusion: CT density shows a good relationship to clinically relevant parameters; however, study heterogeneity and lack of longitudinal data mean that it is difficult to compare studies or derive a minimal clinically important difference. We recommend that international consensus is reached to standardize CT conduct and analysis in future COPD and AATD studies. Keywords: computed tomography, CT, densitometry, emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, alpha-1 anti-trypsin deficiency

Objective:Hypertension is the leading attributable cause of cardiovascular mortality worldwide. Patients with hypertension have multiple comorbidities including high rates of concomitant renal disease. Current pharmacological approaches are inadequate in the treatment of resistant hypertension. Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) has been shown to effectively treat resistant hypertension. The traditional use of iodinated contrast in RDN is contraindicated in patients with significant renal insufficiency. In patients with renal impairment, carbon dioxide (CO2) can be used as an alternative contrast material for RDN. This article describes the technical aspects of RDN using CO2 angiography.Methods:Our centre is experienced in the innovative RDN procedure using CO2 angiography. We describe the protocol for CO2 angiography for RDN using a home-made CO2 delivery system and the Symplicity™ (Minneapolis MN 55432 USA) catheter (Medtronic) device.Results:CO2 angiography is an excellent alternative to iodinated con...