Position statement and best practice recommendations on the imaging use of ultrasound from the European Society of Radiology ultrasound subcommittee

Publisher Copyright: © 2020, The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.This document summarises best practice recommendations for medical imaging use of ultrasound in Europe, representing the agreed consensus of experts from the Ultrasound Subcommittee of the European Society of Radiology (ESR), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Section of Radiology, and the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Recommendations are given for education and training, equipment and its maintenance, documentation, hygiene and infection prevention, and medico-legal issues.Peer reviewe

Patient Safety in Medical Imaging: a joint paper of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) and the European Federation of Radiographer Societies (EFRS)

The fundamental professional roles of radiographers and radiologists are focused on providing benefit to patients with our skills, while maintaining their safety at all times. There are numerous patient safety issues in radiology which must be considered. These encompass: protection from direct harm arising from the techniques and technologies we use; ensuring physical and psychological well-being of patients while under our care; maintaining the highest possible quality of service provision; and protecting the staff to ensure they can deliver safe services. This paper summarises the key categories of safety issues in the provision of radiology services, from the joint perspectives of radiographers and radiologists, and provides references for further reading in all major relevant areas

Diagnosing fibrotic lung disease: When is high-resolution computed tomography sufficient to make a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis?

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), a progressive and fatal diffuse parenchymal lung disease, is defined pathologically by the pattern of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP). Unfortunately, a surgical lung biopsy cannot be performed in all patients due to comorbidities that may significantly increase the morbidity and mortality of the procedure. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) has been put forth as a surrogate to recognize pathological UIP. The quality of the HRCT impacts the ability to make a diagnosis of UIP and varies based on the centre performing the study and patient factors. The evaluation of the HRCT includes assessing the distribution and predominance of key radiographical findings, such as honeycomb, septal thickening, traction bronchiectasis and ground glass attenuation lesions. The combination of the pattern and distribution is what leads to a diagnosis and associated confidence level. HRCT features of definite UIP (subpleural, basal predominant honeycomb with septal thickening, traction bronchiectasis and ground glass attenuation lesions) have a high specificity for the UIP pathological pattern. In such cases, surgical lung biopsy can be avoided. There are caveats to using the HRCT to diagnose IPF in isolation as a variety of chronic pulmonary interstitial diseases may progress to a UIP pattern. Referral centres with experience in diffuse parenchymal lung disease that have multidisciplinary teams encompassing clinicians, radiologists and pathologists have the highest level of agreement in diagnosing IPF.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75246/1/j.1440-1843.2009.01626.x.pd

Core curriculum for medical physicists in radiology. Recommendations from an EFOMP/ESR working group

Some years ago it was decided that a European curriculum should be developed for medical physicists professionally engaged in the support of clinical diagnostic imaging departments. With this in mind, EFOMP (European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics) in association with ESR (European Society of Radiology) nominated an expert working group. This curriculum is now to hand. The curriculum is intended to promote best patient care in radiology departments through the harmonization of education and training of medical physicists to a high standard in diagnostic radiology. It is recommended that a medical physicist working in a radiology department should have an advanced level of professional expertise in X-ray imaging, and additionally, depending on local availability, should acquire knowledge and competencies in overseeing ultrasound imaging, nuclear medicine, and MRI technology. By demonstrating training to a standardized curriculum, medical physicists throughout Europe will enhance their mobility, while maintaining local high standards of medical physics expertise. This document also provides the basis for improved implementation of articles in the European medical exposure directives related to the medical physics expert. The curriculum is divided into three main sections: The first deals with general competencies in the principles of medical physics. The second section describes specific knowledge and skills required for a medical physicist (medical physics expert) to operate clinically in a department of diagnostic radiology. The final section outlines research skills that are also considered to be necessary and appropriate competencies in a career as medical physicist

Strategies for assessing renal function prior to outpatient contrast-enhanced CT: a UK survey

YesThe purpose of this paper is to identify current UK screening practices prior to contrast-enhanced CT. To determine the patient management strategies to minimize the risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) risk in outpatients. An invitation to complete an electronic survey was distributed to the CT managers of 174 UK adult National Health Service hospital trusts. The survey included questions related to local protocols and national guidance on which these are based. Details of the assessment of renal function prior to imaging and thresholds for contrast contraindication and patient management were also sought. A response rate of 47.1% was received. Almost all sites had a policy in place for contrast administration (n = 80/82; 97.6%). The majority of sites require a blood test on outpatients undergoing a contrast-enhanced CT scan (n = 75/82; 91.5%); however, some (15/75; 20.0%) sites only check the result in patients at high risk and a small number (7/82; 8.5%) of sites indicated that it was a referrer responsibility. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or serum creatinine (SCr) result threshold at which i.v. contrast was contraindicated varied and 19 different threshold levels of eGFR or SCr were identified, each leading to different prophylactic strategies. Inconsistency was noted in the provision of follow-up blood tests after contrast administration. The wide variation in practice reflects inconsistencies in published guidance. Evidence-based consensuses of which patients to test and subsequent risk thresholds will aid clinicians identify those patients in which the risk of CI-AKI is clinically significant but manageable. There is also a need to determine the value of the various prophylactic strategies, follow-up regimen and efficient service delivery pathways. This survey has identified that further work is required to define which patients are high risk, confirm those which require renal function testing prior to contrast administration and how best to manage patients at risk of CI-AKI. The role of new technologies within this service delivery pathway requires further investigation

Competency-based (CanMEDS) residency training programme in radiology: systematic design procedure, curriculum and success factors

Based on the CanMEDS framework and the European Training Charter for Clinical Radiology a new radiology curriculum was designed in the Netherlands. Both the development process and the resulting new curriculum are presented in this paper. The new curriculum was developed according to four systematic design principles: discursiveness, hierarchical decomposition, systematic variation and satisficing (satisficing is different from satisfying; in this context, satisficing means searching for an acceptable solution instead of searching for an optimal solution). The new curriculum is organ based with integration of radiological diagnostic techniques, comprises a uniform national common trunk followed by a 2-year subspecialisation, is competency outcome based with appropriate assessment tools and techniques, and is based on regional collaboration among radiology departments. The application of the systematic design principles proved successful in producing a new curriculum approved by all authorities. The principles led to a structured, yet flexible, development process in which creative solutions could be generated and adopters (programme directors, supervisors and residents) were highly involved. Further research is needed to empirically test the components of the new curriculum

Patient Safety in Radiology

AbstractMedical imaging (in short radiology) includes diagnostic and interventional procedures and has an essential role in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases. The objective in this field of medicine is focused on providing diagnostic and therapeutic benefit to the patients along with protecting them from the possible hazards associated with the procedures. By continuously upgrading imaging technologies and improving imaging modalities, such as ultrasound imaging, X-ray-based imaging (radiography, fluoroscopy, and computed tomography), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and interventional radiology, safety has become more and more crucial. The potential hazards in radiology for the patients and the staff are multidimensional and will be discussed in the chapter

Validated imaging biomarkers as decision-making tools in clinical trials and routine practice: current status and recommendations from the EIBALL* subcommittee of the European Society of Radiology (ESR)

Abstract: Observer-driven pattern recognition is the standard for interpretation of medical images. To achieve global parity in interpretation, semi-quantitative scoring systems have been developed based on observer assessments; these are widely used in scoring coronary artery disease, the arthritides and neurological conditions and for indicating the likelihood of malignancy. However, in an era of machine learning and artificial intelligence, it is increasingly desirable that we extract quantitative biomarkers from medical images that inform on disease detection, characterisation, monitoring and assessment of response to treatment. Quantitation has the potential to provide objective decision-support tools in the management pathway of patients. Despite this, the quantitative potential of imaging remains under-exploited because of variability of the measurement, lack of harmonised systems for data acquisition and analysis, and crucially, a paucity of evidence on how such quantitation potentially affects clinical decision-making and patient outcome. This article reviews the current evidence for the use of semi-quantitative and quantitative biomarkers in clinical settings at various stages of the disease pathway including diagnosis, staging and prognosis, as well as predicting and detecting treatment response. It critically appraises current practice and sets out recommendations for using imaging objectively to drive patient management decisions

Standardised lesion segmentation for imaging biomarker quantitation: a consensus recommendation from ESR and EORTC.

BACKGROUND: Lesion/tissue segmentation on digital medical images enables biomarker extraction, image-guided therapy delivery, treatment response measurement, and training/validation for developing artificial intelligence algorithms and workflows. To ensure data reproducibility, criteria for standardised segmentation are critical but currently unavailable. METHODS: A modified Delphi process initiated by the European Imaging Biomarker Alliance (EIBALL) of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Imaging Group was undertaken. Three multidisciplinary task forces addressed modality and image acquisition, segmentation methodology itself, and standards and logistics. Devised survey questions were fed via a facilitator to expert participants. The 58 respondents to Round 1 were invited to participate in Rounds 2-4. Subsequent rounds were informed by responses of previous rounds. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Items with ≥ 75% consensus are considered a recommendation. These include system performance certification, thresholds for image signal-to-noise, contrast-to-noise and tumour-to-background ratios, spatial resolution, and artefact levels. Direct, iterative, and machine or deep learning reconstruction methods, use of a mixture of CE marked and verified research tools were agreed and use of specified reference standards and validation processes considered essential. Operator training and refreshment were considered mandatory for clinical trials and clinical research. Items with a 60-74% agreement require reporting (site-specific accreditation for clinical research, minimal pixel number within lesion segmented, use of post-reconstruction algorithms, operator training refreshment for clinical practice). Items with ≤ 60% agreement are outside current recommendations for segmentation (frequency of system performance tests, use of only CE-marked tools, board certification of operators, frequency of operator refresher training). Recommendations by anatomical area are also specified