Imaging strategies for detection of urgent conditions in patients with acute abdominal pain: diagnostic accuracy study

Objective To identify an optimal imaging strategy for the accurate detection of urgent conditions in patients with acute abdominal pain

A comparison of the Accuracy of Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain

Head-to-head comparison of ultrasound and CT accuracy in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain. Consecutive patients with abdominal pain for > 2 h and <5 days referred for imaging underwent both US and CT by different radiologists/radiological residents. An expert panel assigned a final diagnosis. Ultrasound and CT sensitivity and predictive values were calculated for frequent final diagnoses. Effect of patient characteristics and observer experience on ultrasound sensitivity was studied. Frequent final diagnoses in the 1,021 patients (mean age 47; 55% female) were appendicitis (284; 28%), diverticulitis (118; 12%) and cholecystitis (52; 5%). The sensitivity of CT in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was significantly higher than that of ultrasound: 94% versus 76% (p <0.01) and 81% versus 61% (p = 0.048), respectively. For cholecystitis, the sensitivity of both was 73% (p = 1.00). Positive predictive values did not differ significantly between ultrasound and CT for these conditions. Ultrasound sensitivity in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was not significantly negatively affected by patient characteristics or reader experience. CT misses fewer cases than ultrasound, but both ultrasound and CT can reliably detect common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain. Ultrasound sensitivity was largely not influenced by patient characteristics and reader experience

Low value of routine chest radiographs in a mixed medical-surgical ICU

Objective: To determine the diagnostic efficacy (DE) and therapeutic efficacy (TE) of daily routine chest radiographs (CXRs), and to establish the impact of abandoning this CXR from daily practice on total CYR volume, ICU length of stay (LOS), readmission rate, and ICU mortality. Design: Prospective controlled study in two parts. The first part comprised a I-year period during which attending physicians were blinded for findings on daily routine CXRs and were only informed if something deemed important was seen by the radiologist (predefined major abnormalities) who reviewed all CXRs as usual. The second part comprised a half-year period during which daily routine CXRs were replaced by clinically indicated CXR. Setting: Mixed medical-surgical ICU of a teaching hospital. Results: Data on 1,780 daily routine CXRs in 559 hospital admissions were collected. DE of daily routine CXRs was 4.4%. The most frequent unexpected major abnormalities were new or progressive infiltrates (1.8%) and oropharyngeal tube malposition (0.7%). TE of daily routine CXRs was 1.9%. The most frequent intervention was oropharyngeal tube adjustment (0.6%). No relation was found for DE or TE and hospital admission type or intubation and mechanical ventilation. In the second study part, 433 CXRs were obtained in 274 admissions. Abandoning daily routine CXRs did not affect clinically indicated CXRs orders, or ICU LOS, readmission rate, and mortality. A total CXR volume reduction of 35% (which equaled $9,900 per bed per year [US dollars]) was observed after abandoning daily routine CXRs. Conclusion: Diagnostic and therapeutic value of the daily routine CXR is low. Daily routine CXRs can be safely abandoned in the IC