We compared contrast enhanced ultrasound and fluoroscopic nephrostography in the evaluation of ureteral patency following percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
This prospective cohort, noninferiority study ...was performed after obtaining institutional review board approval. We enrolled eligible patients with kidney and proximal ureteral stones who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy at our center. On postoperative day 1 patients received contrast enhanced ultrasound and fluoroscopic nephrostogram within 2 hours of each other to evaluate ureteral patency, which was the primary outcome of this study.
A total of 92 pairs of imaging studies were performed in 82 patients during the study period. Five study pairs were excluded due to technical errors that prevented imaging interpretation. Females slightly predominated over males with a mean ± SD age of 50.5 ± 15.9 years and a mean body mass index of 29.6 ± 8.6 kg/m2. Of the remaining 87 sets of studies 69 (79.3%) demonstrated concordant findings regarding ureteral patency for the 2 imaging techniques and 18 (20.7%) were discordant. The nephrostomy tube was removed on the same day in 15 of the 17 patients who demonstrated antegrade urine flow only on contrast enhanced ultrasound and they had no subsequent adverse events. No adverse events were noted related to ultrasound contrast injection. While contrast enhanced ultrasound used no ionizing radiation, fluoroscopic nephrostograms provided a mean radiation exposure dose of 2.8 ± 3.7 mGy.
A contrast enhanced ultrasound nephrostogram can be safely performed to evaluate for ureteral patency following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. This imaging technique was mostly concordant with fluoroscopic findings. Most discordance was likely attributable to the higher sensitivity for patency of contrast enhanced ultrasound compared to fluoroscopy.
Purpose
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to significant disruptions in the healthcare system including surges of infected patients exceeding local capacity, closures of ...primary care offices, and delays of non-emergent medical care. Government-initiated measures to decrease healthcare utilization (i.e., “flattening the curve”) have included shelter-in-place mandates and social distancing, which have taken effect across most of the USA. We evaluate the immediate impact of the Public Health Messaging and shelter-in-place mandates on Emergency Department (ED) demand for radiology services.
Methods
We analyzed ED radiology volumes from the five University of California health systems during a 2-week time period following the shelter-in-place mandate and compared those volumes with March 2019 and early April 2019 volumes.
Results
ED radiology volumes declined from the 2019 baseline by 32 to 40% (
p
< 0.001) across the five health systems with a total decrease in volumes across all 5 systems by 35% (
p
< 0.001). Stratifying by subspecialty, the smallest declines were seen in non-trauma thoracic imaging, which decreased 18% (
p
value < 0.001), while all other non-trauma studies decreased by 48% (
p
< 0.001).
Conclusion
Total ED radiology demand may be a marker for public adherence to shelter-in-place mandates, though ED chest radiology demand may increase with an increase in COVID-19 cases.
Summary
Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the ...potential to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever‐growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi‐society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential ...to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever‑growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi‑society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
PDF
