Extra-spinal incidental findings at lumbar spine MRI in the general population: a large cohort study

Prevalence of Incidental Extraspinal Findings on MR Imaging of the Lumbar Spine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is common worldwide. MR imaging may identify extraspinal findings that are not related to the proposed clinical question. The prevalence of extraspinal incidental findings and their clinical significance has not been well-established.

PURPOSE

This review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of extraspinal findings on MR imaging of the lumbar spine in adults and the prevalence of clinically significant incidental findings.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed, including studies published before June 14, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies presenting a prevalence of extraspinal findings in patients 16 years of age or older were included.

DATA ANALYSIS

A random effects meta-analysis was used to generate composite prevalence measures of extraspinal findings, patients with extraspinal findings, and clinically significant findings.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixteen studies were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 19,593 patients and 6,006 extraspinal incidental findings. The overall prevalence of extraspinal findings was 19.9% (95% CI, 11.1%-30.7%). Overall, 26.7% of patients had an extraspinal finding identified (95% CI, 14.8%-40.6%). The most common subgroup of extraspinal findings was genitourinary findings in males (27.1%; 95% CI, 25.6%-28.8%). Data from 8 studies demonstrated the prevalence of clinically significant findings at 5.4% (95% CI, 3.2%-8.1%).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective populations with small numbers of participants in clinically relevant subgroups may result in heterogeneity and imprecision within composite outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Extraspinal findings are common, detected in more than one-quarter of patients. Five percent of findings are clinically significant and may require further action.

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the polytrauma patient assessment: a Delphi consensus proposal

OBJECTIVES

To develop a structured reporting (SR) template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients, based on the consensus of a panel of emergency radiology experts from the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology.

METHODS

A multi-round Delphi method was used to quantify inter-panelist agreement for all SR sections. Internal consistency for each section and quality analysis in terms of average inter-item correlation were evaluated by means of the Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The final SR form included 118 items (6 in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, 4 in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, 9 in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and 99 in the "Report" section). The experts' overall mean score and sum of scores were 4.77 (range 1-5) and 257.56 (range 206-270) in the first Delphi round, and 4.96 (range 4-5) and 208.44 (range 200-210) in the second round, respectively. In the second Delphi round, the experts' overall mean score was higher than in the first round, and standard deviation was lower (3.11 in the second round vs 19.71 in the first round), reflecting a higher expert agreement in the second round. Moreover, Cα was higher in the second round than in the first round (0.97 vs 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Our SR template for whole-body CT examinations of polytrauma patients is based on a strong agreement among panel experts in emergency radiology and could improve communication between radiologists and the trauma team.

Comparison of the clinical usefulness of structured and free-text reports for interpretation of jaw lesions on cone beam computed tomography images

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the clinical usefulness of structured reports (SRs) and free-text reports (FTRs) of lesions depicted on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images from the perspectives of report providers and receivers.

STUDY DESIGN

In total, 36 CBCT images of jaw lesions obtained between February 2020 and August 2020 were evaluated. A working group of 3 oral and maxillofacial radiologists (OMRs) established a reporting system and prepared reports. Evaluation group I (2 OMRs) wrote SRs and FTRs for each case and assessed the reporting process for the criteria of convenience and organization. Evaluation group II (3 general practitioners [GPs] and 3 oral and maxillofacial surgeons [OMSs]) assessed the reports for the criteria of productivity, consistency, and organization. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the usefulness of each report. Scores were statistically compared according to report type with the paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

The SRs scored significantly higher for all criteria as assessed by evaluation group I and the GPs of group II (P < .001). The FTRs scored significantly higher for productivity and organization as assessed by the OMSs of group II (P = .005 for both criteria).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical usefulness of reports may differ according to roles of the report recipients in diagnosis and treatment.

Added value of coronal-T1W sequence to the lumbar MR imaging protocol for low back pain

Introduction:

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most appropriate imaging method to investigate low back pain. As low back pain is very common, a large number of MRI scans are performed.

Objective:

To evaluate the extraspinal findings and clinical effect of the T1-weighted spin echo (T1 W SE) coronal sequence added to the lumbar MRI protocol for low back pain.

Materials and methods:

In 2015, we added a T1-weighted (T1W) coronal sequence to our routine lumbar MRI protocol. We retrospectively evaluated 969 lumbar MRI images for low back pain performed with this protocol. The extraspinal MRI findings obtained from them were then grouped as associated with low back pain (Category 1) and not associated with low back pain (Category 2). We also evaluated whether the recorded incidental extraspinal findings could be detected on conventional sagittal and axial images.

Results:

Ninety-six (63%) of the extraspinal findings were associated with low back pain (Category 1) and 56 (37%), Category 2. Seventy-eight percent of the extraspinal findings were detected only on coronal-T1W images and not on conventional images.

Conclusion:

Adding coronal-T1W sequence to the routine protocol of lumbar MRI can help to identify extraspinal findings and guide clinical treatment.

Analysis of critical report notification from musculoskeletal radiology in a tertiary academic medical institution with a regional trauma center

Purpose

We aimed to analyze the prevalence, causes, and clinical settings of 4-year critical radiologic reports (CRRs) notified from the musculoskeletal section of the radiology department. Then, we investigated the communication outcomes.

Methods

This study was approved by our institutional review board. We retrospectively included 175 musculoskeletal CRRs from our database between January 2017 and December 2020. The CRRs were analyzed by two musculoskeletal radiologists, who categorized the CRRs by clinical setting (emergency department(ED) patient, outpatient, and inpatient), body part, type of image modality, reason for CRR, incidental lesion, and clinical outcome. The clinical outcome was retrieved from the electronic medical records.

Results

The 175 musculoskeletal CRRs accounted for 5.4% of the CRRs (n = 3217) available in the study period. Most CRRs (94.9%, 166/175) corresponded to the musculoskeletal system, while the remaining ones (5.1%, 9/175) corresponded to the non-musculoskeletal system. In addition, the spine, extremities, and thoracic cage accounted for 52.6%, 40.6%, and 1.7% of the musculoskeletal CRRs, respectively. Moreover, most patients presented to the ED (50.3%, 88/175), followed by inpatients (30.9%, 54/175), and outpatients (18.9%, 33/175). The CRR reasons included missed fracture (54.3%), suspected malignancy (16%), clinical emergency (10.3%), unexpected infection/inflammation (11.4%), and others (8%). Furthermore, 11 (6.3%) incidental lesions were not related to the primary imaging purpose. Referring clinicians actively acknowledged 80% of the CRRs. The loss to follow-up action was the highest in the ED patients (35.2%, 31/88; p < 0.001), being significantly higher than that in outpatients (6.1%, 2/33) and inpatients (3.7%, 2/54).

Conclusion

Missed fractures were the most common cause of musculoskeletal CRRs. ED showed prevalence in musculoskeletal CRRs and reflected the highest loss to follow-up action. ED physicians should pay more attention to CRRs to enhance patient care.

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the staging of colon cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal

BACKGROUND

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in colon cancer during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist, members of multidisciplinary teams and patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.

RESULTS

The final SR version was built by including n = 18 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 7 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section and n = 29 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 63 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received a higher than good rating: a mean value of 4.6 and range 3.6-4.9 in the first round; a mean value of 5.0 and range 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was a questionable 0.61. In the first round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.6 (range 1-5) and 1111 (mean value 74.07, STD 4.85), respectively. In the second round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was an acceptable 0.70. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 1108 (mean value 79.14, STD 1.83), respectively. The overall mean score obtained by the experts in the second round was higher than the overall mean score of the first round, with a lower standard deviation value to underline greater agreement among the experts for the structured report reached in this round.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide implementation of SR is of critical importance in order to offer referring physicians and patients optimum quality of service and to provide researchers with the best quality data in the context of big data exploitation of available clinical data. Implementation is a complex procedure, requiring mature technology to successfully address the multiple challenges of user-friendliness, organization and interoperability.

Prevalence and clinical potential of extraspinal incidental findings in lumbosacral spine MRI of patients with suspected disc diseases

BACKGROUND Incidental findings could be observed in organs close to the spine while reporting lumbosacral spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study aimed to report the prevalence and clinical potential of extraspinal incidental findings in lumbosacral MRI of patients with suspected disc diseases. METHODS This single-centered cross-sectional study was carried out on 420 consecutive adult patients who underwent lumbar spine MRI for suspected disc disease from January to July 2019. The MRI was checked for the presence of extraspinal incidental findings, and each finding was categorized according to the body organ and its clinical significance. Each MRI plane that best displayed the findings was recorded, and the association between the findings and patient's age and sex was determined. RESULTS Of 420 samples, 135 cases showed extraspinal findings (32.1%), and 7.6% of the patients displayed suspicious lesions. The urinary tract was the most common system (18.6%) to display both clinically significant (5.0%) and benign findings (13.6%), and the axial MRI section was the plane which showed most of the incidental findings. Incidental findings in any body system were rarely found in the younger patients. Females had significantly higher benign findings than males (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of extraspinal findings in lumbosacral spine MRI is high, and some are significant. Most findings are related to the urinary tract and best displayed in the axial plane.

Frequency of potential causes of lower back pain and incidental findings in patients with suspected sacroiliitis: retrospective analysis of 886 patients with negative sacroiliac MRI examination for sacroiliitis

BACKGROUND

In a majority of patients with suspected sacroiliitis (SI) who underwent sacroiliac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), imaging studies may be normal, may depict other causes for pain, or may show clinically irrelevant incidental findings.

PURPOSE

To determine the prevalence of possible etiologies other than SI and frequency of incidental findings demonstrated on sacroiliac MRI examinations in a cohort of patients with lower back pain and suspected SI.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sacroiliac MRI examinations of 1421 patients with suspected SI were retrospectively reviewed. In patients without SI findings, other potential causes for lower back pain and incidental findings were documented.

RESULTS

SI was present in 535 of 1421 patients (37.6%). In 886 of the patients whose MRI studies were negative for SI, other possible causes for lower back pain or incidental findings were seen in 386 (43.5%). The most common musculoskeletal (MSK) finding was lumbosacral transitional vertebra (8.6%) followed by findings suggesting piriformis syndrome (4.2%), spondylosis (3.7%), and sacral insufficiency fractures (1.8%). The most common non-MSK findings were follicular cysts (15.3%) and uterine fibroids (4.9%).

CONCLUSION

In patients with suspected SI but negative MRI examinations for SI, some other possible causes for lower back pain and several incidental findings can be seen on imaging. The presence of these findings may explain the patient's symptoms, and awareness of these conditions may be helpful in patient management and individualizing treatment.

Computed Tomography Structured Reporting in the Staging of Lymphoma: A Delphi Consensus Proposal

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports for lymphoma patients during the staging phase to improve communication between radiologists, members of multidisciplinary teams, and patients. A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. The Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. The final SR version was divided into four sections: (a) Patient Clinical Data, (b) Clinical Evaluation, (c) Imaging Protocol, and (d) Report, including n = 13 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 8 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n = 32 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 62 items were included in the final version of the SR. A dedicated section of significant images was added as part of the report. In the first Delphi round, all sections received more than a good rating (≥3). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.4 (range 1-5) and 1524 (mean value of 101.6 and standard deviation of 11.8). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.89 in the first round. In the second Delphi round, all sections received more than an excellent rating (≥4). The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for structured report were 4.9 (range 3-5) and 1694 (mean value of 112.9 and standard deviation of 4.0). The Cα correlation coefficient was 0.87 in this round. The highest overall means value, highest sum of scores of the panelists, and smallest standard deviation values of the evaluations in this round reflect the increase of the internal consistency and agreement among experts in the second round compared to first round. The accurate statement of imaging data given to referring physicians is critical for patient care; the information contained affects both the decision-making process and the subsequent treatment. The radiology report is the most important source of clinical imaging information. It conveys critical information about the patient's health and the radiologist's interpretation of medical findings. It also communicates information to the referring physicians and records this information for future clinical and research use. The present SR was generated based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise and uses standardized terminology and structures, in order to adhere to diagnostic/therapeutic recommendations and facilitate enrolment in clinical trials, to reduce any ambiguity that may arise from non-conventional language, and to enable better communication between radiologists and clinicians.

Structured Reporting of Lung Cancer Staging: A Consensus Proposal

Background: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming necessary and has recently been recognized by major scientific societies. This study aimed to build CT-based structured reports for lung cancer during the staging phase, in order to improve communication between radiologists, members of the multidisciplinary team and patients. Materials and Methods: A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi exercise was used to build the structural report and to assess the level of agreement for all the report sections. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to perform a quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. Results: The final SR version was built by including 16 items in the “Patient Clinical Data” section, 4 items in the “Clinical Evaluation” section, 8 items in the “Exam Technique” section, 22 items in the “Report” section, and 5 items in the “Conclusion” section. Overall, 55 items were included in the final version of the SR. The overall mean of the scores of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.5 (range 1–5) and 631 (mean value 67.54, STD 7.53), respectively, in the first round. The items of the structured report with higher accordance in the first round were primary lesion features, lymph nodes, metastasis and conclusions. The overall mean of the scores of the experts and the sum of scores for staging in the structured report were 4.7 (range 4–5) and 807 (mean value 70.11, STD 4.81), respectively, in the second round. The Cronbach’s alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.89 in the first round and 0.92 in the second round for staging in the structured report. Conclusions: The wide implementation of SR is critical for providing referring physicians and patients with the best quality of service, and for providing researchers with the best quality of data in the context of the big data exploitation of the available clinical data. Implementation is complex, requiring mature technology to successfully address pending user-friendliness, organizational and interoperability challenges.

Preparing for the Unexpected: A Review of Incidental Extraspinal Findings on Computed Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Spine

Potentially clinically important incidental/unexpected extraspinal findings occur with sufficient frequency in cross-sectional imaging of the spine to warrant the radiologist's careful consideration, regardless of whether the interpreter is a neuroradiologist, a musculoskeletal radiologist, an emergency radiologist, or a generalist. Awareness of the commonly encountered incidentalomas and the anatomy contained within the field of view of cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine cross-sectional imaging examinations, respectively, assists radiologists in their efficient and accurate analysis. This article familiarizes radiologists with some of the potential relevant extraspinal findings that may be encountered, and recommends an extraspinal search pattern for each spinal segment.

Incidental extraspinal imaging findings on adult EOS full body radiographs: prevalence and clinical importance

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to review our institutional experience with the EOS machine in order to identify the incidence and clinical significance of incidental extraspinal findings (IESF) in an adult spinal deformity population.

Methods

Our institutional database was queried for all full-length standing radiographs generated by the EOS machine. Dictations were reviewed and the number of incidental extraspinal findings were classified using a previously described system. All findings related to the spine were excluded. A subset of electronic medical records were reviewed to determine further workup for individual findings of suspected clinical significance.

Results

Original database query based on radiology reports returned a total of 1857 EOS studies. Duplicate studies, studies without the entire body, and patients with more than 1 study during the search period were excluded. 503 patient studies (55.5% female, mean age 59-years-old, range 18 to 91-years-old) met inclusion criteria. The overall rate of incidental extraspinal findings in our study was 60.4% (304 findings in 503 patients). Most findings were classified as Minor. The rate of Major and Moderate findings was 4.8%. The final rate of clinically significant incidental extraspinal findings was 0.8% and included 3 presumed metastatic lesions in long bones and 1 pulmonary nodule.

Conclusion

To our knowledge this is the first study that reports the rate of incidental extraspinal findings on full body EOS studies. We report a low rate (0.8%) of clinically significant incidental extraspinal findings which is lower than that of CT or MRI. Further research is warranted in comparing EOS and standard radiography.

Extraspinal findings prevalence and clinical significance in 4250 lumbar spine MRI exams

To assess extraspinal findings (ESFs) prevalence in lumbar spine MRI, including clinically significant findings using a systematic approach, and to determine their reporting rate. Lumbar spine MRI scans were retrospectively reviewed over 18 months by two radiologists. Reading discrepancies were resolved by consensus. ESFs were classified according to the involved system, clinical diagnosis, and clinical significance. The reporting rate was estimated by referring to the original report. There were 1509 ESFs in 1322/4250 patients with a substantial agreement between the two radiologists (kappa = 0.8). Almost half (621/1322) were in the 45–60 age group. Females represented 56.6% (748/1322). 74.2% (1120/1509) of the ESFs involved the urinary system among which 79.6% (892/1120) were renal cysts. Clinically significant findings represented 8.7% (131/1509) among which hydronephrosis represented 23% (30/131). First time detected malignant lesions represented 4.6% (6/131). ESFs reporting rate was 47.3%. 58.8% of the clinically significant ESFs were not reported. ESFs prevalence was 31.1%. The Urinary system was the most commonly involved. Most ESFs were benign warranting no further workup. However, clinically significant ESF were not infrequently detected. More than half of the clinically significant findings were not reported. A systematic review of MRI images is highly recommended to improve patient’s outcome.

Reported and Unreported Potentially Important Incidental Findings in Urgent Nonenhanced Abdominal CT for Renal Colic

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to retrospectively evaluate the prevalence of reported and unreported potentially important incidental findings (PIFs) in consecutive nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed specifically for renal colic in the urgent setting.

METHODS

One radiologist, blinded to the finalized report, retrospectively re-evaluated nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed from January to December 2017 on adult patients from the emergency department with the specific request of urgent evaluation for renal colic, searching for PIFs.

RESULTS

The CTs of 312 patients were included in the study. Thirty-eight findings were reported in 38 different CTs, whereas the re-evaluation added 47 unreported findings in 47 different CTs, adding to total of 85 findings (27%). The difference in the proportion of reported and unreported PIFs between the original report and re-evaluation was significant (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between the age of patients with and without reported findings. The proportion of potentially important findings did not vary significantly among the 3 shifts in the original report and in re-evaluation. The most frequent findings, both reported and unreported, were pleural effusion, lymphadenopathies, and liver nodules.

CONCLUSIONS

Potentially important additional findings are frequently present in urgent nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed for renal colic, and many are not described in the finalized reports. Radiologists should take care not to underreport PIFs even in the urgent setting because of the possible consequences on the patient's health and in order to avoid legal issues, while at the same time satisfying the need for timely and efficient reporting.

Structured Reporting of Computed Tomography in the Staging of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Delphi Consensus Proposal

BACKGROUND

Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist and members of multidisciplinary teams.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A Modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation.

RESULTS

The final SR version was built by including n=16 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n=13 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n=8 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section, and n=17 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 54 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received more than a good rating: a mean value of 4.7 and range of 4.2-5.0 in the first round and a mean value 4.9 and range of 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a poor 0.57: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.7 (range 1-5) and 728 (mean value 52.00 and standard deviation 2.83), respectively. In the second round, the Cα correlation coefficient was a good 0.82: the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 760 (mean value 54.29 and standard deviation 1.64), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present SR, based on a multi-round consensus-building Delphi exercise following in-depth discussion between expert radiologists in gastro-enteric and oncological imaging, derived from a multidisciplinary agreement between a radiologist, medical oncologist and surgeon in order to obtain the most appropriate communication tool for referring physicians.

Revealing the most common reporting errors through data mining of the report proofreading process

Objectives

To investigate the most common errors in residents’ preliminary reports, if structured reporting impacts error types and frequencies, and to identify possible implications for resident education and patient safety.

Material and methods

Changes in report content were tracked by a report comparison tool on a word level and extracted for 78,625 radiology reports dictated from September 2017 to December 2018 in our department. Following data aggregation according to word stems and stratification by subspecialty (e.g., neuroradiology) and imaging modality, frequencies of additions/deletions were analyzed for findings and impression report section separately and compared between subgroups.

Results

Overall modifications per report averaged 4.1 words, with demonstrably higher amounts of changes for cross-sectional imaging (CT: 6.4; MRI: 6.7) than non-cross-sectional imaging (radiographs: 0.2; ultrasound: 2.8). The four most frequently changed words (right, left, one, and none) remained almost similar among all subgroups (range: 0.072–0.117 per report; once every 9–14 reports). Albeit representing only 0.02% of analyzed words, they accounted for up to 9.7% of all observed changes. Subspecialties solely using structured reporting had substantially lower change ratios in the findings report section (mean: 0.2 per report) compared with prose-style reporting subspecialties (mean: 2.0). Relative frequencies of the most changed words remained unchanged.

Conclusion

Residents’ most common reporting errors in all subspecialties and modalities are laterality discriminator confusions (left/right) and unnoticed descriptor misregistration by speech recognition (one/none). Structured reporting reduces overall error rates, but does not affect occurrence of the most common errors. Increased error awareness and measures improving report correctness and ensuring patient safety are required.

Key Points

• The two most common reporting errors in residents’ preliminary reports are laterality discriminator confusions (left/right) and unnoticed descriptor misregistration by speech recognition (one/none).

• Structured reporting reduces the overall the error frequency in the findings report section by a factor of 10 (structured reporting: mean 0.2 per report; prose-style reporting: 2.0) but does not affect the occurrence of the two major errors.

• Staff radiologist review behavior noticeably differs between radiology subspecialties.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-020-07306-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adding Value in Radiology Reporting

The major goal of the radiology report is to deliver timely, accurate, and actionable information to the patient care team and the patient. Structured reporting offers multiple advantages over traditional free-text reporting, including reduction in diagnostic error, comprehensiveness, adherence to national consensus guidelines, revenue capture, data collection, and research. Various technological innovations enhance integration of structured reporting into everyday clinical practice. This review discusses the benefits of innovations in radiology reporting to the clinical decision process, the patient experience, the cost of imaging, and the overall contributions to the health of the population. Future directions, including the use of artificial intelligence, are reviewed.

IBD considerations in spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) may be regarded a family of auto-inflammatory conditions with inflammation focused on the joints. These form part of a wider family of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, which include inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). These conditions share common elements of pathophysiology and it is perhaps unsurprising, therefore, that individuals with SpA frequently manifest gastrointestinal inflammation, to which the physician managing the patient with SpA must be alert. In this article, we review the shared epidemiology and pathophysiology of these conditions, before discussing approaches to diagnosis and management of inflammatory gastrointestinal pathology in patients seen in rheumatology clinics. In particular, we discuss the difference between non-specific gastrointestinal inflammation commonly described in this patient group and the more specific diagnosis of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. We describe the appropriate diagnostic workup for patients suspected of having IBD. In addition, we discuss how a diagnosis of IBD can inform treatment selection, highlighting important differences in treatment choice, drug dosing, monitoring and drug safety for this particular comorbid patient population.

Evaluation of Radiology Reports by the Emergency Department Clinical Providers: A Message to Radiologists

Objectives:

This study is an evaluation of the emergency department (ED) satisfaction with the current radiologic reporting system used at a major Northeastern academic medical center. The radiology reports are the main form of communication and usually the final product of any radiological investigation delivered to clinicians. The aim of this study was to improve current radiology reporting practices and to better tailor reports to match the needs and expectations of ED clinicians.

Methods:

A 9-question online survey was sent to ED residents, fellows, faculty, and nurse practitioners/advanced practice providers at a major Northeastern academic medical center in the United States. For the open-ended section, coding and emergent theme categorization was conducted for quantification of responses. The survey was designed to evaluate the attitudes toward the structure, style, form, and wording used in reports.

Results:

The response rate was 48.6% (68/140). The ED respondents were generally satisfied with radiology reports, their language, vocabulary, and clarity. They preferred the impression section to be before the findings in simple examinations and to stratify the reports according to emergency status for complex examinations. They did not like extended differential, hedge terms, and delayed reporting. Additionally, ED respondents recommended focused, fast reporting with considerable changes toward a more standardized report.

Conclusions:

This evaluation delivered a list of actionable recommendations. The top recommendation is to standardize reporting structure, style, and lexicon, in addition to being focused, timely, and brief.

Perceptual and Interpretive Error in Diagnostic Radiology-Causes and Potential Solutions

Interpretation of increasingly complex imaging studies involves multiple intricate tasks requiring visual evaluation, cognitive processing, and decision-making. At each stage of this process, there are opportunities for error due to human factors including perceptual and ergonomic conditions. Investigation into the root causes of interpretive error in radiology first began over a century ago. In more recent work, there has been increasing recognition of the limits of human image perception and other human factors and greater acknowledgement of the role of the radiologist's environment in increasing the risk of error. This article reviews the state of research on perceptual and interpretive error in radiology. This article focuses on avenues for further error examination, and strategies for mitigating these errors are discussed. The relationship between artificial intelligence and interpretive error is also considered.

Incidentalomas in Spine and Spinal Cord Imaging

Incidentalomas are common in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine. These incidental findings (IFs) can be seen involving the spinal cord, nerve root, vertebral body, posterior arch and the extraspinal region. This review article describes the imaging findings, stratifies the IFs similar to the computed tomography (CT) colonography reporting and data system and briefly mentions the current recommendations for further evaluation and management of IFs. Radiologists are the first to detect these lesions, suggest further evaluation and management of IFs. It is therefore mandatory for them to be aware of recommendations in clinical practice in order to avoid increased patient anxiety, excessive healthcare expenditure and inadvertent therapeutic procedures.

Beyond the Spinal Canal

Cross-sectional spinal imaging is common, and extraspinal findings are often incidentally identified during interpretation. Although some of these findings may cause symptoms that mimic a spinal disorder, the majority are entirely asymptomatic and incidental. It is essential that the radiologist not only identify those abnormalities that may have clinical significance but also recognize those that are clinically irrelevant and thereby prevent patients from being subjected to further unnecessary, expensive and potentially harmful interventions. This article focuses on those abnormalities that are commonly encountered and provides practical guidance for follow-up and management based on current recommendations.

Incidental Renal Lesions on Lumbar Spine MRI: Who Needs Follow-Up?

OBJECTIVE

Incidentally discovered renal lesions on lumbar spine MRI are a common occurrence. Many follow-up recommendations are generated by radiologists encountering renal lesions to help characterize the finding as a benign cyst or a more complex, potentially malignant lesion. We hypothesized that analysis of T2-weighted imaging features of incidentally discovered renal lesions could reliably distinguish complex renal lesions from simple cysts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent readers retrospectively evaluated 149 renal lesions identified on lumbar spine MRI examinations. Presence or absence of a complex renal lesion was determined using T2-weighted imaging only. Using dedicated renal cross-sectional imaging examinations as the reference standard, statistical analysis was performed to determine the accuracy of lumbar spine MRI in predicting a complex and potentially neoplastic renal lesion.

RESULTS

Of 149 renal lesions, 115 were simple cysts, and 34 were complex renal lesions (20 Bosniak II cysts, nine renal cell carcinomas, three Bosniak IIF cysts, and two angiomyolipomas). Lumbar spine MRI readers identified 72 lesions as simple cysts and 77 lesions as complex renal lesions. Reader sensitivity for detection of a complex renal lesion on lumbar spine MRI was 94% (95% CI, 80-99%); specificity, 63% (95% CI, 53-72%); positive predictive value, 43% (95% CI, 37-49%); and negative predictive value, 97% (95% CI, 90-99%). Readers correctly identified all neoplastic and potentially neoplastic lesions (≥ Bosniak IIF). Interreader agreement was excellent (κ = 0.84).

CONCLUSION

Follow-up imaging may not be required in all cases of incidentally discovered renal lesions on lumbar spine MRI. Analysis of T2-weighted imaging alone appears to reliably rule out neoplastic and potentially neoplastic complex renal lesions.

Incidental extraspinal findings in the lumbar spine during magnetic resonance imaging of intervertebral discs

Purpose

To calculate the frequencies of incidental extraspinal findings and incidentally detected congenital anomalies or anatomical differences in the lumbar spine on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of intervertebral discs.

Materials and methods

A total of 379 lumbar spine MRI cases were prospectively investigated in the period spanning from August 2016 to January 2018. Both 1.5 and 0.35 Tesla MRI units (Toshiba and Siemens Medical Systems) were used to examine patients with clinically suspected intervertebral disc abnormalities at three MRI diagnostic centers in Khartoum State, Sudan.

Results

Of the 379(100%) patients, 90(23.7%) patients were presented with incidental findings. Among the incidental findings, 39(10.3%) were renal cysts, 10(2.6%) were retroverted uteri, 5(1.3%) were Nabothian cysts, 4(1.1%) were ovarian cysts, 10(2.6%) were uterine fibroids, 3(0.8%) were endometrial thickening, 11(2.9%) were indicative of hydronephrosis, 4(1.1%) were uncovered prostatic enlargement, 2(0.5%) were atrophic kidney, and 1(0.3%) each was of an ectopic kidney and bladder wall thickening, respectively.

Conclusions

A high percentage of extraspinal pathological findings were detected during MRI lumbar spine scans of intervertebral discs. Thus, it is important to be aware of the high percentage of patients who undergo further evaluation given the presence of unexpected findings, but for whom clinical confirmation of these abnormalities is not obtained.

Is the routine use of magnetic resonance imaging indicated in patients with scoliosis?

Background

To assess the reliability of the indicators for performing magnetic resonance imaging in patients with scoliosis and assess the incidence of neural axis anomalies in a population with scoliosis referred to a specialist centre.

Methods

A retrospective review of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports of all patients under the age of 18 who underwent a pre-operative MRI for investigation of their scoliosis between 2009 and 2014 at a single institution was performed.

Results

There were 851 patients who underwent an MRI scan of their whole spine with a mean age of 14.08 years. There were 211 males and 640 females. One hundred and fourteen neural axis abnormalities (NAA) were identified. The presence of a left sided thoracic curve, a double thoracic curve, being male nor being diagnosed before the age of 10 were found to be statistically significant for the presence of a NAA. Furthermore, 2.34% of patients were also found to have an incidental finding (IF) of an extraspinal abnormality.

Conclusions

From our series, the reported indications for performing an MRI scan in the presence of scoliosis are not reliable for the presence of an underlying NAA. We have demonstrated that there is a number of intra and extra dural anomalies found on MRI without clinical symptoms and signs. This acts as normative information for this group.

Keywords

Scoliosis; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); neural axis abnormalities (NAA); adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Clinical impact of coronal-STIR sequence in a routine lumbar spine MR imaging protocol to investigate low back pain

Aim of this study is to assess the clinical impact of coronal short tau inversion recovery (STIR)-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) sequence, when acquired in a lumbar spine MR imaging protocol, in detecting significant extraspinal imaging findings in patients with low back pain (LBP).We retrospectively evaluated 931 lumbar spine MR examinations of patients with LBP. Extraspinal MR imaging findings were categorized as: probably related to LBP (Category 1), not related to LBP but with relevant implications on patient's care (Category 2), and not related to LBP without significant implications on patient's care (Category 3). For each MR imaging finding was also assessed if it was detectable or not on the conventional sagittal and axial acquisition planes.Of the 931 evaluated MR examinations, 60 (6.4%) showed additional extraspinal MR imaging findings, categorized as follows: 55% (33/60) probably related to LBP (Category 1), 22% (13/60) not related to LBP but with relevant implications on patient's care (Category 2), and 23% (14/60) not related to LBP and without significant implications on patient's care (Category 3). Among categories 1 and 2 (n = 46), the 72% (33/46) of imaging findings were detected only on coronal plane. Coronal-STIR sequence significantly changed patients' diagnostic work-flow in 3.5% (33/931) of cases.Coronal STIR sequence, acquired in a lumbar spine MR imaging protocol to investigate LBP, may aid radiologists in detecting additional extraspinal MR imaging findings that could be related to LBP, addressing to the most appropriate clinical management.

Structured Reporting in Radiology

Radiology reports are vital for patient care as referring physicians depend upon them for deciding appropriate patient management. Traditional narrative reports are associated with excessive variability in the language, length, and style, which can minimize report clarity and make it difficult for referring clinicians to identify key information needed for patient care. Structured reporting has been advocated as a potential solution for improving the quality of radiology reports. The Association of University Radiologists-Radiology Research Alliance Structured Reporting Task Force convened to explore the current and future role of structured reporting in radiology and summarized its finding in this article. We review the advantages and disadvantages of structured radiology reports and discuss the current prevailing sentiments among radiologists regarding structured reports. We also discuss the obstacles to the use of structured reports and highlight ways to overcome some of those challenges. We also discuss the future directions in radiology reporting in the era of personalized medicine.

Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections: Incidental Extraspinal Findings on Planning Imaging

OBJECTIVE

Planning imaging performed during CT-guided procedures may occasionally contain important incidental findings. The purpose of this study was to identify and characterize by clinical relevance the extraspinal findings detected on planning imaging for CT-guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four radiologists retrospectively evaluated the planning scout views and CT studies for 488 consecutive CT-guided lumbar TFESIs performed in 400 patients over a 1-year period. Incidental extraspinal findings were identified and used to characterize patients by the need for follow-up using the CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS), a classification scheme originally developed to characterize incidental findings on CT colonography. Patients with C-RADS E4 findings have potentially important findings that should be communicated to the referring physician; patients with C-RADS E3 findings have findings that are likely unimportant, but workup may be indicated. All previously unknown C-RADS E3 and E4 findings discovered in the course of this research were reported to referring physicians for appropriate patient follow-up.

RESULTS

Ten of 400 (2.5%) patients were classified as C-RADS E4; the most common C-RADS E4 finding was vascular aneurysm or stenosis (4/400, 1.0%). Thirteen of 400 (3.3%) patients were classified as C-RADS E3; the most common C-RADS E3 finding was hepatomegaly (4/400, 1.0%). Of 22 patients with C-RADS E3 and E4 findings unknown to clinicians, the finding for only one (4.5%) was communicated to clinicians at the time of the procedure.

CONCLUSION

Clinically important incidental extraspinal findings were identified in 5.8% of patients on the planning imaging performed for CT-guided lumbar TFESIs. Communication of clinically important findings was poor (4.5%).

Whole-body MRI in patients with lymphoma: collateral findings

PURPOSE

To assess the incidence of collateral findings detected on whole-body magnetic resonance (WB-MRI) scans performed on patients with lymphoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

114 patients (65 male; median age 45.2 years, range 15-86) with histologically confirmed lymphoma (47 Hodgkin, 67 Non-Hodgkin) underwent WB-MRI. The collateral findings were classified into three classes, according to their clinical significance, as follows: not or low significant (class 1), moderately or potentially significant (class 2), and significant (class 3). A Chi-square (χ (2)) test was performed to assess the statistical significance of differences in the incidence of collateral findings based on age (≤50 and >50 years old), gender and histology (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma).

RESULTS

Ninety-one of 114 patients (79.8 %) had one or more incidental findings on WB-MRI. Collateral findings were more frequent in class 1 (43 %); abnormalities found in 35 patients (30.7 %) were considered potentially significant, whereas seven patients (6.1 %) demonstrated significant collateral findings requiring immediate treatment or further diagnostic evaluation. Collateral findings were more frequent in subjects over 50 years old compared to those of 50 years old or younger; differences were statistical significant (χ (2) = 8.42, p < 0.05). There were not statistically significant differences related to gender (χ (2) = 0.17, p > 0.05) and histology (χ (2) = 0.24, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

WB-MRI is an attractive procedure that allows to detect incidental abnormalities of organs not involved by disease offering the opportunity to obtain an early diagnosis of asymptomatic life-threatening diseases.

How reliable is routine lumbar spine MRI for detection of renal cysts? Correlation with abdominal CT

BACKGROUND

Incidental renal cysts are a very common finding in routine lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, there is no report of the renal cyst detection rate on routine lumbar spine MRI.

PURPOSE

To determine the renal cyst detection rate in routine lumbar spine MRI based on findings of abdominal computed tomography (CT), and to investigate if the largest renal cyst seen by abdominal CT could be also detected by routine lumbar spine MRI.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of 70 patients who underwent both routine lumbar spine MRI and abdominal CT between December 2011 and January 2014. The detection rate of all renal cysts>5 mm as well as the largest renal cyst seen by abdominal CT were assessed in routine lumbar spine MRI.

RESULTS

On routine lumbar spine MRI, the detection rate of renal cysts was 46.5% (73/157) for>5-mm renal cysts and 68.0% (34/50) for>10-mm renal cysts, correlating with abdominal CT. The detection rate of the largest renal cyst seen by abdominal CT was 60.0% (27/45). Non-detection of the largest renal cyst could be caused by upper positioning (n = 7), lateral positioning (n = 6), or relatively small cyst size (n = 5).

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of renal cysts>5 mm and two-thirds of renal cysts>10 mm were detected on routine lumbar spine MRI. However, radiologists should be aware that kidney lesions may not be included in the scan coverage of routine lumbar spine MRI.

Incidental Extraspinal Findings at Lumbar Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Retrospective Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study of a consecutive series of patients undergoing lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for low back pain at a single institution.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence and nondetection rate of incidental extraspinal findings (IESFs) in adult patients undergoing MRI of the lumbar spine performed for low back pain by using a structured approach.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Extraspinal findings are depicted on lumbar spine magnetic resonance image. There is limited evidence concerning their prevalence, importance, how often they are missed by interpreting physician, and how to improve their detection.

METHODS

Our study was approved by our institutional review board committee, which waived informed consent because it was retrospective. Lumbar spine magnetic resonance images obtained for low back pain at our institution from January 2011 to December 2013 were assessed by 3 readers for IESFs using a structured approach and their results compared with the archived reports. Repeat lumbar spine MRI and cases with a history of trauma were excluded. A total of 3024 lumbar spine magnetic resonance images were included. IESFs were classified according to the organ involved and to the model adopted by the modified CT Colonography Reporting and Data System (C-RADS). Nondetection rates were determined by comparing the results of our structured approach with the archived MRI reports.

RESULTS

A total of 859 IESFs were found in 671 of 3024 lumbar spine patients undergoing MRI (22%). A total of 623 out of them (73%) were categorized E2 (clinically unimportant finding), 192 (22%) were categorized E3 (likely unimportant finding), and 44 (5%) were categorized E4 (potentially important finding). A total of 347 of 859 findings were not mentioned in the archived reports for a nondetection rate of 40%. The nondetection rate for E4 category findings was 38.6% (17/44).

CONCLUSION

IESFs on lumbar spine MRI are common with a significant nondetection rate of 40% using a nonstructured approach. Specifically, there was a significant nondetection rate of 38.6% for potentially important (E4) findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Extraspinal Incidental Findings on Routine MRI of Lumbar Spine: Prevalence and Reporting Rates in 1278 Patients

Objective

The aim of the present study was to determine the prevalence and reporting rate of incidental findings (IF) in adult outpatients undergoing lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Materials and Methods

Re-evaluation of a total of 1278 lumbar MRI images (collected from patients with a mean age of 50.5 years, range 16-91 years) captured between August 2010-August 2011 was done by a neuroradiologist and a musculoskeletal radiologist. IFs were classified according to organ or system (liver, gallbladder, kidney, bladder, uterus, ovary, lymph node, intestine and aorta). The rate of reporting of a range of IF was examined. The outcome of each patient's treatment was evaluated based on review of hospital records and by telephone interviews.

Results

A total of 253 IFs were found in 241 patients (18.8% of 1278). Among these, clinically significant IFs (n = 34) included: 2 renal masses (0.15%), 2 aortic aneurysms (0.15%), 2 cases of hydronephrosis (0.15%), 11 adrenal masses (0.86%), 7 lymphadenopathies (0.55%), 6 cases of endometrial or cervical thickening (0.47%), 1 liver hemangioma (0.08%), 1 pelvic fluid (0.08%) and 2 ovarian dermoid cysts (0.15%). Overall, 28% (71/253) of IFs were included in the clinical reports, while clinically significant findings were reported in 41% (14/34) of cases.

Conclusion

Extraspinal IFs are commonly detected during a routine lumbar MRI, and many of these findings are not clinically significant. However, IFs including clinically important findings are occasionally omitted from formal radiological reports.

Lumbar subcutaneous edema and degenerative spinal disease in patients with low back pain: a retrospective MRI study

PURPOSE

This study was designed to determine the association between LSE, spondylolisthesis, facet arthropathy, lumbar canal stenosis, BMI, radiculopathy and bone marrow edema at conventional lumbar spine MR imaging.

METHODS

This is a retrospective radiological study; 441 consecutive patients with low back pain (224 men and 217 women; mean age 57.3 years; mean BMI 26) underwent conventional lumbar MRI using a 1.5-T magnet (Avanto, Siemens). Lumbar MR images were reviewed by consensus for the presence of LSE, spondylolisthesis, facet arthropathy, lumbar canal stenosis, radiculopathy and bone marrow edema. Descriptive statistics and association studies were conducted using STATA software 11.0. Association studies have been performed using linear univariate regression analysis and multivariate regression analysis, considering LSE as response variable.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of LSE was 40%; spondylolisthesis (p = 0.01), facet arthropathy (p < 0.001), BMI (p = 0.008) and lumbar canal stenosis (p < 0.001) were included in the multivariate regression model, whereas bone marrow edema, radiculopathy and age were not.

CONCLUSIONS

LSE is highly associated with spondylolisthesis, facet arthropathy and BMI, suggesting underestimation of its clinical impact as an integral component in chronic lumbar back pain. Longitudinal simultaneous X-ray/MRI studies should be conducted to test the relationship of LSE with lumbar spinal instability and low back pain.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine in children: spinal incidental findings in pediatric patients

Study Design Retrospective case series. Objective To determine the rate of spinal incidental findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine in the pediatric population. Methods We reviewed MRI imaging of the neuraxial spine in patients less than 18 years of age and documented abnormal spinal findings. We then reviewed the charts of these patients to determine the reason for ordering the study. Those who presented with pain were considered symptomatic. Those who had no presenting complaint were considered asymptomatic. The data were analyzed to break down the rate of spinal incidental findings in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, respectively. Results Thirty-one of the 99 MRIs had positive findings, with the most common being disk protrusion (51.6%). Spinal incidental findings were most common in the lumbar spine (9.4%) versus the cervical spine (8%) or thoracic spine (4.7%). In this group, Schmorl nodes and disk protrusion were the two most common findings (37.5% each). Other spinal incidental findings included a vertebral hemangioma and a Tarlov cyst. In the thoracic spine, the only spinal incidental finding was a central disk protrusion without spinal cord or nerve root compression. Conclusion MRI is a useful modality in the pediatric patient with scoliosis or complaints of pain, but the provider should remain cognizant of the potential for spinal incidental findings.

Incidence and evaluation of incidental abnormal bone marrow signal on magnetic resonance imaging

Purpose. The increased use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has resulted in reports of incidental abnormal bone marrow (BM) signal. Our goal was to determine the evaluation of an incidental abnormal BM signal on MRI and the prevalence of a subsequent oncologic diagnosis. Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients over age 18 undergoing MRI between May 2005 and October 2010 at Tufts Medical Center (TMC) with follow-up through November 2013. The electronic medical record was queried to determine imaging site, reason for scan, evaluation following radiology report, and final diagnosis. Results. 49,678 MRIs were done with 110 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Twenty two percent underwent some evaluation, most commonly a complete blood count, serum protein electrophoresis, or bone scan. With median follow-up of 41 months, 6% of patients were diagnosed with malignancies including multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, and metastatic adenocarcinoma. One patient who had not undergone evaluation developed breast cancer 24 months after the MRI. Conclusions. Incidentally noted abnormal or heterogeneous bone marrow signal on MRI was not inconsequential and should prompt further evaluation.

National audit of appropriate imaging

AIMS

To audit the availability of imaging referral guidelines; vetting by radiologists of GP-initiated CT and MRI requests; and the achievement of appropriate imaging using retrospective assessment as a surrogate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A web-based questionnaire was distributed to imaging departments in the UK seeking awareness of guideline availability; the percentage of consecutive general practitioner (GP)-requested computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) investigations that showed evidence of vetting; and the percentage of procedures where retrospective assessment showed the investigation to be appropriate according to imaging referral guidelines.

RESULTS

Replies were received from 88 departments covering 1700 of 2700 (63%) consultant radiologists practising in the UK. Regarding the availability of guidelines, approximately a third of respondents were not aware of guidelines being available to all radiologists and radiographers. The 68% level of availability (58/88 departments) is well below the standard of 100%. In keeping with the target of 95%, vetting of CT requests was shown in 1815/1890 (96%) and MRI in 1181/1250 (95%). Appropriateness of CT examinations was shown in 1746/1870 (93%) and MRI in 1154/1215 (95%), well above the target of 90%. The most common reason for an inappropriate investigation for both MRI and CT was the inability to affect patient management.

CONCLUSIONS

Although awareness of referral guidelines availability was limited at 68%, well below the 100% standard, the meticulous vetting of requests (shown in 95-96%) with the amendment or return of inappropriate requests (9-12%) enables a high level of appropriate imaging (93-95%) for GP-requested CT and MRI, thus making the best use of clinical radiology.