Ultrasound (US) is an extremely useful diagnostic imaging modality because of its real-time capability, noninvasiveness, portability, and relatively low cost. It carries none of the potential risks of ionizing radiation exposure or intravenous contrast administration. For these reasons, numerous medical specialties now rely on US not only for diagnosis and guidance for procedures, but also as an extension of the physical examination. In addition, many medical school educators recognize the usefulness of this technique as an aid to teaching anatomy, physiology, pathology, and physical diagnosis. Radiologists are especially interested in teaching medical students the appropriate use of US in clinical practice. Educators who recognize the power of this tool have sought to incorporate it into the medical school curriculum. The basic question that educators should ask themselves is: "What should a student graduating from medical school know about US?" To aid them in answering this question, US specialists from the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound and the Alliance of Medical School Educators in Radiology have collaborated in the design of a US curriculum for medical students. The implementation of such a curriculum will vary from institution to institution, depending on the resources of the medical school and space in the overall curriculum. Two different examples of how US can be incorporated vertically or horizontally into a curriculum are described, along with an explanation as to how this curriculum satisfies the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education competencies, modified for the education of our future physicians.
Purpose:To determine for expert and novice radiologists repeat . Agreement for measured diameter was almost perfect (range, 0.95-0.97). There was substantial agreement for most scores consistent with HCC. Experts agreed significantly more than did novices and were significantly more likely than were novices to assign a diagnosis of HCC (P , .001). Conclusion:Two of three major features for HCC (washout appearance and pseudocapsule) have only moderate interreader agreement. Experts and novices who assigned scores consistent with HCC had substantial but not perfect agreement. Expert agreement is substantial for OPTN, but moderate for LI-RADS and AASLD. Novices were less consistent and less likely to diagnose HCC than were experts.q RSNA, 2014
Interventions designed to limit the spread of COVID-19 are having profound effects on the delivery of healthcare, but data showing the impact on oncology clinical trial enrollment, treatment, and monitoring are limited. We prospectively tracked relevant data from oncology clinical trials at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2020, including the number of open trials, new patient enrollments, in-person and virtual patient visits, dispensed investigational infusions, dispensed/shipped oral investigational agents, research biopsies, and blood samples. We ascertained why patients came off trials and determined on-site clinical research staffing levels. We used two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum tests to assess the statistical significance of the reported changes. Nearly all patients on interventional treatment trials were maintained, and new enrollments continued at just under half the pre-pandemic rate. The median number of investigational prescriptions shipped to patients increased from 0-74 (range: 22-107) per week from March-June 2020. The median number of telemedicine appointments increased from 0-107 (range: 33-267) per week from March-June 2020. Research biopsies and blood collections decreased dramatically after DFCI implemented COVID-19-related policies in March 2020. The number of research nurses and clinical research coordinators on-site also decreased after March 2020. Substantial changes were required to safely continue clinical research during the pandemic; yet, we observed no increases in serious adverse events or major violations related to drug dosing. Lessons learned from adapting research practices during COVID-19 can inform industry sponsors and governmental agencies to consider altering practices to increase operational efficiency and convenience for patients.
CT urography is an accurate test for diagnosing bladder cancer; however, in protocols relying predominantly on excretory phase images, overall sensitivity remains insufficient to obviate cystoscopy. Awareness of bladder cancer mimics may reduce false-positive results. Improvements in CTU technique may reduce false-negative results.
The most recent edition of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS version 2) was developed based on expert consensus of the international working group on prostate cancer. It provides the minimum acceptable technical standards for MR image acquisition and suggests a structured method for multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) reporting. T1-weighted, T2-weighted (T2W), diffusion weighted (DWI), and dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) imaging are the suggested sequences to include in mpMRI. The PI-RADS version 2 scoring system enables the reader to assess and rate all focal lesions detected at mpMRI to determine the likelihood of a clinically significant cancer. According to PI-RADS v2 a lesion with a Gleason score ≥7, volume >0.5 cc, or extraprostatic extension is considered clinically significant. PI-RADS v2 uses the concept of a dominant MR sequence based on zonal location of the lesion rather than summing each component score, as was the case in version 1. The dominant sequence in the peripheral zone is DWI and the corresponding apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map, with a secondary role for DCE in equivocal cases (PI-RADS score 3). For lesions in the transition zone, T2W images are the dominant sequence with DWI/ADC images playing a supporting role in the case of an equivocal lesion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.