No abstract

A number of studies have demonstrated that bone scintigraphy has high sensitivity and efficacy in the early detection of bone metastases from several tumours, including breast cancer. Bone scintigraphy is the most definitive tool for diagnosing and monitoring metastatic spread of breast cancer. However, in the past decade there has been a wide debate on its impact on survival time, morbidity and quality of life. Worldwide economic restrictions and these studies have led to the adoption of an almost minimalist policy for breast cancer follow-up using evidence-based guidelines. The recommended breast cancer surveillance testing includes only a few procedures (history, physical and breast self-examination, patient education on symptoms, pelvic examination). The routine use of additional tests, such as blood cell count, tumour markers, liver ultrasonography, bone scan and chest X-rays, is not recommended. Accordingly, scintigraphy should be reserved for a limited number of patients. On the other hand, early diagnosis of bone involvement may reduce the risk of skeletal related events, thus leading to a significant improvement in quality of life. Furthermore, new drugs (e.g. bisphosphonates) can now delay the onset of bone metastasis and reduce the number of patients who experience skeletal complications. In conclusion, the evidence of the clinical usefulness of bone scintigraphy (to allow early planning of new treatments in advanced disease) has to be re-evaluated, possibly by large randomised prospective trials.

A wireless hand-held Webpad device was used to review a sample set of cranial computerized tomography (CT) studies to assess its diagnostic capabilities and its feasibility as a portable diagnostic workstation for radiology. The data-set consisted of 30 head CT studies of emergency cases. Two neuroradiologists and a senior radiologist participated in the evaluation of the portable workstation. They used a Web-based viewer that we developed, which provided all the major functionalities required for radiological image review. The reported radiological findings and diagnoses were compared with a gold standard, comprising a set of diagnoses previously formulated by a consensus panel of radiologists who had reviewed the original studies. The diagnoses made using the Webpad were correct (no major discrepancies) in 82 out of 90 interpretations (91%), which is comparable to the accuracy reported in image review with a conventional radiological workstation. The average total working time per diagnosis was 5 min 25 s (range 2-12 min). The simplicity of use of the system and its low cost make it suitable for distributing radiological studies within hospital facilities.

No abstract

No abstract