Search

Acute appendicitis represents the most common abdominal surgical urgency/emergency in children. Imaging remains a central tool in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis and has been shown to facilitate management and decrease the rate of negative appendectomies. The initial consideration for imaging in a child with suspected acute appendicitis is based on clinical assessment, which can be facilitated with published scoring systems. The level of clinical risk (low, intermediate, high) and the clinical scenario (suspicion for complication) define the need for imaging and the optimal imaging modality. In some situations, no imaging is required, while in others ultrasound, CT, or MRI may be appropriate. This review frames the presentation of suspected acute appendicitis in terms of the clinical risk and also discusses the unique situations of the equivocal or nondiagnostic initial ultrasound examination and suspected appendicitis with suspicion for complication (eg, bowel obstruction). 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]

Imaging plays in important role in the evaluation of the acutely limping child. The decision-making process about initial imaging must consider the level of suspicion for infection and whether symptoms can be localized. The appropriateness of specific imaging examinations in the acutely limping child to age 5 years is discussed with attention in each clinical scenario to the role of radiography, ultrasound, nuclear medicine, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Common causes of limping such as toddler's fracture, septic arthritis, transient synovitis, and osteomyelitis are discussed. 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]

Hematuria is the presence of red blood cells in the urine, either visible to the eye (macroscopic hematuria) or as viewed under the microscope (microscopic hematuria). The clinical evaluation of children and adolescents with any form of hematuria begins with a meticulous history and thorough evaluation of the urine. The need for imaging evaluation depends on the clinical scenario in which hematuria presents, including the suspected etiology. Ultrasound and CT are the most common imaging methods used to assess hematuria in children, although other imaging modalities may be appropriate in certain instances. This review focuses on the following clinical variations of childhood hematuria: isolated hematuria (nonpainful, nontraumatic, and microscopic versus macroscopic), painful hematuria (ie, suspected nephrolithiasis or urolithiasis), and renal trauma with hematuria (microscopic versus macroscopic). 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]

The youngest children, particularly in the first year of life, are the most vulnerable to physical abuse. Skeletal survey is the universal screening examination in children 24 months of age and younger. Fractures occur in over half of abused children. Rib fractures may be the only abnormality in about 30%. A repeat limited skeletal survey after 2 weeks can detect additional fractures and can provide fracture dating information. The type and extent of additional imaging for pediatric patients being evaluated for suspected physical abuse depends on the age of the child, the presence of neurologic signs and symptoms, evidence of thoracic or abdominopelvic injuries, and social considerations. Unenhanced CT of the head is the initial study for suspected intracranial injury. Clinically occult abusive head trauma can occur, especially in young infants. Therefore, head CT should be performed in selected neurologically asymptomatic physical abuse patients. Contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen/pelvis is utilized for suspected intra-abdominal or pelvic injury. Particular attention should be paid to discrepancies between the patterns of injury and the reported clinical history. Making the diagnosis of child abuse also requires differentiation from anatomical and developmental variants and possible underlying metabolic and genetic conditions. 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]

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is common in young children and may cause pyelonephritis and renal scarring. Long-term complications from renal scarring are low. The role of imaging is to evaluate for underlying urologic abnormalities and guide treatment. In neonates there is increased risk for underlying urologic abnormalities. Evaluation for vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) may be appropriate especially in boys because of higher prevalence of VUR and to exclude posterior urethral valve. In children older than 2 months with first episode of uncomplicated UTI, there is no clear benefit of prophylactic antibiotic. Ultrasound is the only study that is usually appropriate. After the age of 6 years, UTIs are infrequent. There is no need for routine imaging as VUR is less common. In children with recurrent or complicated UTI, in addition to ultrasound, imaging of VUR is usually appropriate. Renal cortical scintigraphy may be appropriate in children with VUR, as renal scarring may support surgical intervention. 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]

OBJECTIVE. Medicare permits radiologists to bill for trainee work but only in narrowly defined circumstances and with considerable consequences for noncompliance. The purpose of this article is to introduce relevant policy rationale and definitions, review payment requirements, outline documentation and operational considerations for diagnostic and interventional radiology services, and offer practical suggestions for academic radiologists striving to optimize regulatory compliance. CONCLUSION. As academic radiology departments advance their missions of service, teaching, and scholarship, most rely on residents and fellows to support expanding clinical demands. Given the risks of technical noncompliance, institutional commitment and ongoing education regarding teaching supervision compliance are warranted.

This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine, European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Canadian Association of Radiologists, and American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AI has great potential to increase efficiency and accuracy throughout radiology, but it also carries inherent pitfalls and biases. Widespread use of AI-based intelligent and autonomous systems in radiology can increase the risk of systemic errors with high consequence and highlights complex ethical and societal issues. Currently, there is little experience using AI for patient care in diverse clinical settings. Extensive research is needed to understand how to best deploy AI in clinical practice. This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a just manner. We believe AI should respect human rights and freedoms, including dignity and privacy. It should be designed for maximum transparency and dependability. Ultimate responsibility and accountability for AI remains with its human designers and operators for the foreseeable future. The radiology community should start now to develop codes of ethics and practice for AI that promote any use that helps patients and the common good and should block use of radiology data and algorithms for financial gain without those two attributes., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Imaging plays in important role in the evaluation of the acutely limping child. The decision-making process about initial imaging must consider the level of suspicion for infection and whether symptoms can be localized. The appropriateness of specific imaging examinations in the acutely limping child to age 5 years is discussed with attention in each clinical scenario to the role of radiography, ultrasound, nuclear medicine, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Common causes of limping such as toddler's fracture, septic arthritis, transient synovitis, and osteomyelitis are discussed. 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.)