ACR Appropriateness Criteria\u3csup\u3e®\u3c/sup\u3e Multiple Gestations

© 2017 American College of Radiology Women with twin or higher-order pregnancies will typically have more ultrasound examinations than women with a singleton pregnancy. Most women will have at minimum a first trimester scan, a nuchal translucency evaluation scan, fetal anatomy scan at 18 to 22 weeks, and one or more scans in the third trimester to evaluate growth. Multiple gestations are at higher risk for preterm delivery, congenital anomalies, fetal growth restriction, placenta previa, vasa previa, and velamentous cord insertion. Chorionicity and amnionicity should be determined as early as possible when a twin pregnancy is identified to permit triage of the monochorionic group into a closer surveillance model. Screening for congenital heart disease is warranted in monochorionic twins because they have an increased rate of congenital cardiac anomalies. In addition, monochorionic twins have a higher risk of developing cardiac abnormalities in later gestation related to right ventricular outflow obstruction, in particular the subgroups with twin-twin transfusion syndrome or selective intrauterine growth restriction. Monochorionic twins have unique complications including twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, twin embolization syndrome, and acardius, or twin-reversed arterial perfusion sequence. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment

ACR Appropriateness Criteria \u3csup\u3e®\u3c/sup\u3e Clinically Suspected Adnexal Mass, No Acute Symptoms

© 2019 American College of Radiology There are approximately 9.1 pelvic surgeries performed for every histologically confirmed adnexal malignancy in the United States, compared to 2.3 surgeries per malignancy (in oncology centers) and 5.9 surgeries per malignancy (in other centers) in Europe. An important prognostic factor in the long-term survival in patients with ovarian malignancy is the initial management by a gynecological oncologist. With high accuracy of imaging for adnexal mass characterization and consequent appropriate triage to subspecialty referral, the better use of gynecologic oncology can improve treatment outcomes. Ultrasound, including transabdominal, transvaginal, and duplex ultrasound, combined with MRI with contrast can diagnose adnexal masses as benign with specific features (ie, functional masses, dermoid, endometrioma, fibroma, pedunculated fibroid, hydrosalpinx, peritoneal inclusion cyst, Tarlov cyst), malignant, or indeterminate. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment

Adult advanced life support : 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations for advanced life support includes updates on multiple advanced life support topics addressed with 3 different types of reviews. Topics were prioritized on the basis of both recent interest within the resuscitation community and the amount of new evidence available since any previous review. Systematic reviews addressed higher-priority topics, and included double-sequential defibrillation, intravenous versus intraosseous route for drug administration during cardiac arrest, point-of-care echocardiography for intra-arrest prognostication, cardiac arrest caused by pulmonary embolism, postresuscitation oxygenation and ventilation, prophylactic antibiotics after resuscitation, postresuscitation seizure prophylaxis and treatment, and neuroprognostication. New or updated treatment recommendations on these topics are presented. Scoping reviews were conducted for anticipatory charging and monitoring of physiological parameters during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Topics for which systematic reviews and new Consensuses on Science With Treatment Recommendations were completed since 2015 are also summarized here. All remaining topics reviewed were addressed with evidence updates to identify any new evidence and to help determine which topics should be the highest priority for systematic reviews in the next 1 to 2 years