17 results on '"Parsons, Matthew S."'
Search Results
2. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging of Facial Trauma Following Primary Survey
- Author
-
Parsons, Matthew S., Policeni, Bruno, Juliano, Amy F., Agarwal, Mohit, Benjamin, Elizabeth R., Burns, Judah, Doerr, Timothy, Dubey, Prachi, Friedman, Elliott R., Gule-Monroe, Maria K., Gutowski, Karol A., Hagiwara, Mari, Jain, Vikas, Rath, Tanya J., Shian, Brian, Surasi, Devaki Shilpa, Taheri, M. Reza, Zander, David, and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging of Suspected Intracranial Hypotension.
- Author
-
Timpone, Vincent M., Parsons, Matthew S., Boulter, Daniel J., Burns, Judah, Eldaya, Rami W., Grossberg, Jonathan A., Hassankhani, Alvand, Hutchins, Troy A., Kelly, Adam G., Khan, Majid A., Ortiz, A. Orlando, Potter, Christopher A., Shah, Vinil N., Shih, Richard D., Wright, Chadwick L., and Policeni, Bruno
- Abstract
The clinical syndrome of intracranial hypotension refers to the symptoms caused by cerebrospinal fluid hypovolemia and is primarily characterized by postural headaches, but can be associated with a multitude of other neurological symptoms. Imaging plays a critical role in helping to establish a diagnosis of intracranial hypotension, localize the source of cerebrospinal fluid leak, and assist in directing targeted treatments. Using the best available evidence, this document provides diagnostic imaging recommendations for the workup of intracranial hypotension across various clinical presentations. 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 process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Thoracic Back Pain.
- Author
-
Shah, Vinil N., Parsons, Matthew S., Boulter, Daniel J., Burns, Judah, Callaghan, Brian, Eldaya, Rami, Hanak, Michael, Hassankhani, Alvand, Hutchins, Troy A., Jackson, Christopher D., Khan, Majid A., Mullin, Jeff, Ortiz, A. Orlando, Reitman, Charles, Sampson, Christopher, Sandstrom, Claire K., Timpone, Vincent M., Trout, Andrew T., and Policeni, Bruno
- Abstract
Thoracic back pain is a common site for inflammatory, neoplastic, metabolic, infectious, and degenerative conditions, and may be associated with significant disability and morbidity. Uncomplicated acute thoracic back pain and/or radiculopathy does not typically warrant imaging. Imaging may be considered in those patients who have persistent pain despite 6 weeks of conservative treatment. Early imaging may also be warranted in patients presenting with "red flag" history or symptoms, including those with a known or suspected history of cancer, infection, immunosuppression, or trauma; in myelopathic patients; or in those with a history of prior thoracic spine fusion. 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 process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Parathyroid Adenoma
- Author
-
Zander, David, Bunch, Paul M., Policeni, Bruno, Juliano, Amy F., Carneiro-Pla, Denise, Dubey, Prachi, Gule-Monroe, Maria K., Hagiwara, Mari, Hoang, Jenny K., Jain, Vikas, Kim, Lawrence T., Moonis, Gul, Parsons, Matthew S., Rath, Tanya J., Solórzano, Carmen C., Subramaniam, Rathan M., Taheri, M. Reza, DuChene Thoma, Kate, Trout, Andrew T., Zafereo, Mark E., Jr., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Plexopathy: 2021 Update
- Author
-
Boulter, Daniel J., Job, Joici, Shah, Lubdha M., Wessell, Daniel E., Lenchik, Leon, Parsons, Matthew S., Agarwal, Vikas, Appel, Marc, Burns, Judah, Hutchins, Troy A., Kendi, A. Tuba, Khan, Majid A., Liebeskind, David S., Moritani, Toshio, Ortiz, A. Orlando, Shah, Vinil N., Singh, Simranjit, Than, Khoi D., Timpone, Vincent M., Beaman, Francesca D., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Suspected Spine Infection
- Author
-
Ortiz, A. Orlando, Levitt, Alex, Shah, Lubdha M., Parsons, Matthew S., Agarwal, Vikas, Baldwin, Keith, Bhattacharyya, Shamik, Boulter, Daniel J., Burns, Judah, Fink, Kathleen R., Hunt, Christopher H., Hutchins, Troy A., Kao, Lillian S., Khan, Majid A., Lo, Bruce M., Moritani, Toshio, Reitman, Charles, Repplinger, Michael D., Shah, Vinil N., Singh, Simranjit, Timpone, Vincent M., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Low Back Pain: 2021 Update
- Author
-
Hutchins, Troy A., Peckham, Miriam, Shah, Lubdha M., Parsons, Matthew S., Agarwal, Vikas, Boulter, Daniel J., Burns, Judah, Cassidy, R. Carter, Davis, Melissa A., Holly, Langston T., Hunt, Christopher H., Khan, Majid A., Moritani, Toshio, Ortiz, A. Orlando, O’Toole, John E., Powers, William J., Promes, Susan B., Reitman, Charles, Shah, Vinil N., Singh, Simranjit, Timpone, Vincent M., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Myelopathy: 2021 Update
- Author
-
Agarwal, Vikas, Shah, Lubdha M., Parsons, Matthew S., Boulter, Daniel J., Cassidy, R. Carter, Hutchins, Troy A., Jamlik-Omari Johnson, Kendi, A. Tuba, Khan, Majid A., Liebeskind, David S., Moritani, Toshio, Ortiz, A. Orlando, Reitman, Charles, Shah, Vinil N., Snyder, Laura A., Timpone, Vincent M., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Ataxia
- Author
-
Juliano, Amy F., Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Bykowski, Julie, Harvey, H. Benjamin, Hoang, Jenny K., Hunt, Christopher H., Kennedy, Tabassum A., Moonis, Gul, Pannell, Jeffrey S., Parsons, Matthew S., Powers, William J., Rosenow, Joshua M., Schroeder, Jason W., Slavin, Konstantin, Whitehead, Matthew T., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Neuroendocrine Imaging
- Author
-
Burns, Judah, Policeni, Bruno, Bykowski, Julie, Dubey, Prachi, Germano, Isabelle M., Jain, Vikas, Juliano, Amy F., Moonis, Gul, Parsons, Matthew S., Powers, William J., Rath, Tanya J., Schroeder, Jason W., Subramaniam, Rathan M., Taheri, M. Reza, Whitehead, Matthew T., Zander, David, and Corey, Amanda
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Thyroid Disease
- Author
-
Hoang, Jenny K., Oldan, Jorge D., Mandel, Susan J., Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Bykowski, Julie, Harvey, H. Benjamin, Juliano, Amy F., Kennedy, Tabassum A., Moonis, Gul, Pannell, Jeffrey S., Parsons, Matthew S., Schroeder, Jason W., Subramaniam, Rathan M., Whitehead, Matthew T., and Corey, Amanda S.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Orbits Vision and Visual Loss
- Author
-
Kennedy, Tabassum A., Corey, Amanda S., Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Harvey, H. Benjamin, Hoang, Jenny, Hunt, Christopher H., Juliano, Amy F., Mack, William, Moonis, Gul, Murad, Gregory J.A., Pannell, Jeffrey S., Parsons, Matthew S., Powers, William J., Schroeder, Jason W., Setzen, Gavin, Whitehead, Matthew T., and Bykowski, Julie
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
14. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Ataxia.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, Juliano, Amy F, Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Bykowski, Julie, Harvey, H Benjamin, Hoang, Jenny K, Hunt, Christopher H, Kennedy, Tabassum A, Moonis, Gul, Pannell, Jeffrey S, Parsons, Matthew S, Powers, William J, Rosenow, Joshua M, Schroeder, Jason W, Slavin, Konstantin, Whitehead, Matthew T, and Corey, Amanda S
- Abstract
Ataxia can result from an abnormality in the cerebellum, spinal cord, peripheral nerves, and/or vestibular system. Pathology involving the brain, such as infarct or hydrocephalus, can also present with ataxia as part of the symptom constitution, or result in symptoms that mimic ataxia. Clinical evaluation by history and careful neurological examination is important to help with lesion localization, and helps determine where imaging should be focused. In the setting of trauma with the area of suspicion in the brain, a head CT without intravenous contrast is the preferred initial imaging choice. If vascular injury is suspected, CTA of the neck can be helpful. When the area of suspicion is in the spine, CT or MRI of the spine can be considered to assess for bony or soft-tissue injury, respectively. In the setting of ataxia unrelated to recent trauma, MRI is the preferred imaging modality, tailored to assess the brain or spine depending on the area of suspected pathology. The use of intravenous contrast is generally helpful. 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
15. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Thyroid Disease.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurological Imaging:, Hoang, Jenny K, Oldan, Jorge D, Mandel, Susan J, Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Bykowski, Julie, Harvey, H Benjamin, Juliano, Amy F, Kennedy, Tabassum A, Moonis, Gul, Pannell, Jeffrey S, Parsons, Matthew S, Schroeder, Jason W, Subramaniam, Rathan M, Whitehead, Matthew T, and Corey, Amanda S
- Abstract
There are a wide variety of diseases that affect the thyroid gland ranging from hyperplastic to neoplastic, autoimmune, or inflammatory. They can present with functional abnormality or a palpable structural change. Imaging has a key role in diagnosing and characterizing the thyroid finding for management. Imaging is also essential in the management of thyroid cancer. 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
16. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Neuroendocrine Imaging.
- Author
-
Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:, Burns, Judah, Policeni, Bruno, Bykowski, Julie, Dubey, Prachi, Germano, Isabelle M, Jain, Vikas, Juliano, Amy F, Moonis, Gul, Parsons, Matthew S, Powers, William J, Rath, Tanya J, Schroeder, Jason W, Subramaniam, Rathan M, Taheri, M Reza, Whitehead, Matthew T, Zander, David, and Corey, Amanda
- Abstract
Neuroendocrine dysfunction includes suspected hyper- and hypofunction of the pituitary gland. Causative lesions may include primary masses of the pituitary such as pituitary microadenomas and macroadenomas, as well as extrinsic masses, typically centered in the suprasellar cistern. Clinical syndromes related to hormonal dysfunction can be caused by excessive hormonal secretion or by inhibited secretion due to mass effect upon elements of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. Additionally, complications such as hemorrhage may be seen in the setting of an underlying mass and can result in hormonal dysfunction. MRI with high-resolution protocols is the best first-line test to evaluate the sella turcica and parasellar region. CT provides complementary information regarding bony anatomy, and may be appropriate as a first-line test in certain instances, but it provides less detail and lesion characterization when compared to MRI. 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® Orbits Vision and Visual Loss.
- Author
-
Kennedy, Tabassum A., Corey, Amanda S., Policeni, Bruno, Agarwal, Vikas, Burns, Judah, Harvey, H. Benjamin, Hoang, Jenny, Hunt, Christopher H., Juliano, Amy F., Mack, William, Moonis, Gul, Murad, Gregory J.A., Pannell, Jeffrey S., Parsons, Matthew S., Powers, William J., Schroeder, Jason W., Setzen, Gavin, Whitehead, Matthew T., Bykowski, Julie, and Expert Panel on Neurologic Imaging:
- Abstract
Visual loss can be the result of an abnormality anywhere along the visual pathway including the globe, optic nerve, optic chiasm, optic tract, thalamus, optic radiations or primary visual cortex. Appropriate imaging analysis of visual loss is facilitated by a compartmental approach that establishes a differential diagnosis on the basis of suspected lesion location and specific clinical features. CT and MRI are the primary imaging modalities used to evaluate patients with visual loss and are often complementary in evaluating these patients. One modality may be preferred over the other depending on the specific clinical scenario. Depending on the pattern of visual loss and differential diagnosis, imaging coverage may require targeted evaluation of the orbits and/or assessment of the brain. Contrast is preferred when masses and inflammatory processes are differential considerations. 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
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.