Screening for distant metastases in patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence: the impact of different imaging modalities on distant recurrence-free interval

Purpose In patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), the detection of distant disease determines whether the intention of the treatment is curative or palliative. Therefore, adequate preoperative staging is imperative for optimal treatment planning. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of conventional imaging techniques, including chest X-ray and/or CT thorax-(abdomen), liver ultrasonography(US), and skeletal scintigraphy, on the distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) in patients with IBTR, and to compare conventional imaging with 18F-FDG PET-CT or no imaging at all. Methods This study was exclusively based on the information available at time of diagnoses of IBTR. To adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between the three imaging groups, a propensity score (PS) weighted method was used. Results Of the 495 patients included in the study, 229 (46.3%) were staged with conventional imaging, 89 patients (19.8%) were staged with 18F-FDG PET-CT, and in 168 of the patients (33.9%) no imaging was used (N=168). After a follow-up of approximately 5 years, 14.5% of all patients developed a distant recurrence as frst event after IBTR. After adjusting for the PS weights, the Cox regression analyses showed that the diferent staging methods had no signifcant impact on the DRFI. Conclusions This study showed a wide variation in the use of imaging modalities for staging IBTR patients in the Netherlands. After using PS weighting, no statistically signifcant impact of the diferent imaging modalities on DRFI was shown. Based on these results, it is not possible to recommend staging for distant metastases using 18F-FDG PET-CT over conventional imaging technique

Breast reconstruction after mastectomy: does it decrease depression at the long-term?

Perioperative Medicine: Efficacy, Safety and Outcom

Comparison of Imaging Strategies with Conditional Contrast-enhanced CT and Unenhanced MR Imaging in Patients Suspected of Having Appendicitis: A Multicenter Diagnostic Performance Study

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of imaging strategies with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and computed tomographic (CT) imaging in adult patients suspected of having appendicitis. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained prior to study initiation, and patients gave written informed consent. In a multicenter diagnostic performance study, adults suspected of having appendicitis were prospectively identified in the emergency department. Consenting patients underwent ultrasonography (US) and subsequent contrast-enhanced CT if US imaging yielded negative or inconclusive results. Additionally, all patients underwent unenhanced MR imaging, with the Results: Between March and September 2010, 229 US, 115 CT, and 223 MR examinations were performed in 230 patients (median age, 35 years; 40% men). Appendicitis was the final diagnosis in 118 cases. Conditional and immediate MR imaging had sensitivity and specificity comparable to that of conditional CT, which resulted in 3% (three of 118; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1%, 7%) missed appendicitis, and 8% (10 of 125; 95% CI: 4%, 14%) false-positives. Conditional MR missed appendicitis in 2% (two o Conclusion: The accuracy of conditional or immediate MR imaging was similar to that of conditional CT in patients suspected of having appendicitis, which implied that strategies with MR imaging may replace conditional CT for appendicitis detection. (C) RSNA, 201