Introduction To optimize CT chest protocol by comparing venous contrast timing with arterial timing for contrast opacification in vessels, qualitative image quality and radiologists’ satisfaction and diagnostic confidence in assessing for potential nodal, pleural and pulmonary disease in general oncology outpatients. Method Matched case−control study performed following CT protocol update. 92 patients with a range of primary malignancies with 2 CT chests in a 2‐year period, one with an arterial phase protocol and the second in the 60 second venous phase, were included. Contrast attenuation in aorta, pulmonary artery and liver were measured. Subjective measurements assessed perivenous artefact, confidence in nodal pleural and pulmonary assessment and presence of pulmonary emboli. Statistical analysis was performed using paired and unpaired t‐tests. Results Venous‐phase CT demonstrated more consistent enhancement of the vessels, with higher attenuation of the nodes, pulmonary and pleural lesions. There was a significant reduction in perivenous beam hardening artefact on venous‐phase CT (P < 0.001). Diagnostic confidence was significantly higher for nodal assessment and pleural abnormality visibility (P < 0.001) and pleural assessment (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in pulmonary mass visibility. There was adequate enhancement to diagnose significant pulmonary emboli (PE) with 4 incidental PEs detected on the venous phase, extending to segmental vessels. Conclusion Venous‐phase CT chest performs better than arterial‐phase on all fronts, without compromising assessment of incidental pulmonary emboli. When intravenous contrast is indicated in a routine chest CT (excluding a CT‐angiogram), the default timing should be a venous or 60s phase.

The spinal epidural and posterior ligamentous complex spaces are important anatomic regions which are the target of various radiologic procedures in the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine for the purpose of analgesia and anaesthesia. Given the frequency with which procedures are performed in and around the epidural space, a sound understanding of the associated anatomy is paramount to ensure the safety and efficacy of procedural intervention.

The expanding scope of interventional musculoskeletal procedures has resulted in increased pressure on general radiologists. The confidence of general radiologists in performing ultrasound-guided musculoskeletal procedures varies with their clinical exposure. This didactic review provides a methodologically and clinically oriented approach to enhancing user understanding and confidence in performing ultrasound-guided musculoskeletal procedures. The body of the text is accompanied by figures depicting the procedural approach, injection site, and labeled ultrasonography images. This paper aims to provide a teaching and bedside aid for education on and the execution of musculoskeletal procedures to ensure the provision of quality health care.

Introduction. This manuscript aims to investigate the amount of intraluminal gas in acute, nonperforated appendicitis identified on computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing gangrenous appendicitis. Methods. This is a retrospective observational, case-control study with consecutive data collected at a tertiary institution over a two-year period, of patients with CT-diagnosed acute appendicitis who subsequently went on for surgery within 48 hours. Patients who were less than 16 years old, who had an interval between CT and surgery of more than 48 hours, or with CT evidence of appendiceal perforation were excluded. Images were independently assessed by 3 radiologists for intraluminal gas, and the results were then correlated with reference standards obtained from surgical and histopathology reports for the diagnosis of nongangrenous versus gangrenous appendicitis. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of CT intraluminal gas in gangrenous appendicitis were calculated. Results. Our study identified 93 patients with nonperforated acute appendicitis who underwent surgery within the stated timeframe. Intraluminal gas in the appendix was identified in 26 patients (28%), of which 54% had macroscopic and/or microscopic evidence of gangrenous appendicitis. This is in contrast to the subgroup of patients who did not have intraluminal gas (72%), of which only 33% had gangrenous appendicitis. The specificity of intraluminal gas for gangrenous appendicitis is 79%, with a negative predictive value of 86% and likelihood ratio of 1.85. Conclusion. In cases of established acute appendicitis, the presence of intraluminal gas is a moderately specific sign for gangrenous complication. This is worth reporting as it can help prognosticate and triage patients accordingly, for a timelier surgical management and a better outcome.