DONNA MAGID, MD, MEd DIRECTOR, JHU SOM RADIOLOGY …

Download Report

Transcript DONNA MAGID, MD, MEd DIRECTOR, JHU SOM RADIOLOGY …

Introduction to MSK Imaging Studies:

“Don’t Panic” Donna Magid, MD, M.Ed

Director, Horizontal Strand in Diagnostic Imaging Professor, Radiology, Orthopaedic Surgery, and Functional Anatomy and Evolution

Objectives

Introductory concepts of MSK Imaging

 ‘

REQUESTING

vs ‘ORDERING’ studies 

Sequencing

MSK studies: what to do when  ACR Appropriateness Criteria to the rescue!

Give you life-long fishing skills rather than handing over fish.

Common errors

: Forgetting “One view is no view” Skipping usual steps Not reviewing older studies  Pro/cons of common imaging modalities: XR, CT, MR, US

YOU: Intelligent Consumers of Medical Resources (not optional)

 Common indix . head CT = “R/o stroke, dizzy”  Legitimate concern for stroke ( but overinclusive ).

 Inner-ear-pt. subset: benign, conservative tt.

 Better clinical ED screen for benign ear etiologies could reduce CT in US by

$500 million/year.

Newman-Toker et al, Academic Emergency Medicine July 2013

“ Intelligent Consumer” may mean

NOT

utilizing imaging

(unnecessarily…$, dose)

 ED (

USA)

2006: 34% radiographed

(more, JHH)

  12% CT Pitts, Niska et al National Health Statistics report (7)2006 CT tripled, 1996  2010 Smith-Bindeman, JAMA June 2012 “KISS” : Import old studies! Outside studies reduce new by:

17% overall CT: 29%

Sodickson, Opraseuth, Ledbetter ; RADIOLOGY 2011:260 (2)

Remember one does not ‘ ORDER

one ‘ REQUESTS

an exam’,

a CONSULT’

Consulting Radiologist

needs info. to confirm:  Correct study requested    Correct Pt. Meds, allergies, status, caveats Cost/benefit ratio favors the patient: Risk, dose, pain, complications, sometimes $$ ‘Will it alter management?’ If not—NO!

DNR, religious beliefs, life expectancy… Info already known or available (old images)

The Imaging Requisition

 Electronic, faxed, written….. Varies, morphs often  Pt. Name – MRN – DOB – Location (wrist band, paperwork, chart)

Deal-breakers

= Misspelling, mismatches  Contact/Requesting Clinician, ACCURATE phone, page: Questions before test performed    URGENT findings, emergencies Females of child-bearing age (~9 to 90): Pregnancy status Known allergies Known caveats or contraindications (dialysis stent, implants, metal, 1 day post-op, deaf, non English speaking…)

Imaging Request asks a question “Worry/Don’t Worry”

      “Normal/Abnormal” (old images!) “Better/Worse” (size, radiodensity , signal, fluid…) “Bigger/Smaller/Unchanged” Narrow or confirm initial DDx Better localize a finding (in 3D, organ, tissue, …) Better characterize a finding (cystic, solid,…)

Requistion: Clinical Info

 Concise and Precise (“G.I.G.O.”) “Fx”,“R/O”,“Pain”,“Fell” … inadequate!

Localize with ONE finger Describe mechanism/force if trauma: “MVC” vs or “Belted passenger, T-boned on R high veloc.’ ”Pedestrian, struck laterally in parking lot, landed on/pain R hip” Time frame : new; older; chronic ‘Today…5 days ago… 4 months …..

5 years……’

Give us

adequate info

and

not a protocol query,

 Clinical info, DDx, concerns, clues, labs, query  Let

us

protocol the technical details of exam  Let

us

decide on which machine (esp. CT, MR) CT:

“R/O intracranial bleed, fell 8 ft, LOC

”,

not

just “Dry head CT, reformats” w/o clinical info MR :

“Adenoca lung, confusion, R/O brain mets”;

not

‘T1, T2, brain w/, w/o, contrast”, no other info

INTRODUCTORY MSK IMAGING: ‘

Don’t Panic’

Musculoskeletal Imaging:

Bones (cortical, articular, marrow, physis) Joints (cartilage, ligament, tendon, fluid) Ligaments, Tendons

(XR, MR)

Cartilage (articular, meniscal, fibro-:

XR

,

MR, CT,)

Soft tissue (muscle, fascia, fat:

XR, CT, MR, US)

Vascular (vessels, blood supply:

XR

,

CT, MR, US

) Neurography (

MR)

MSK Imaging:

cost/benefit

 Pediatric vs Adult (hip, appx, brain: US v CT)  Fertility, Life expectancy  DDx (differential diagnosis) Trauma Infectious/inflammatory Neoplastic Vascular Iatrogenic Arthritis, connective tissue Metabolic Developmental/congenital/gene tic Normal or Nl. Variant

MSK Imaging

Tx- and Dx-Specific

DDx (differential diagnosis)

Trauma (acute, chronic, velocity or force) Infectious/inflammatory (acute, chronic, immunocomp.) Neoplastic (new, treated, recurrent) Vascular Iatrogenic (surgery, foreign matter, Rx) Arthritis, connective tissue Metabolic Developmental/congenital/gene tic

Give us adequate info, query; not a protocol

Imaging techniques, equipment, changing rapidly . Unlikely a non-Radiologist can keep up; even Radiologists are scrambling.

On line Mind Palaces….

Modalities: ‘First Things First’

Short-cuts counterproductive

RADIOGRAPHY

(conventional images) remains the gateway to (MSK) imaging assessment.

It is NOT going away .

XR plus Time may still Trump Tissue, MR, CT

RADIOGRAPHY: “One View Is No View”

Once a study indicated –

no

shortcuts.

Not for age, gender, cost, dose…….

 Many findings underwhelm on one view  Complex 3D structures need 2 Views Fractures, Dislocations Toddler’s Fracture Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis

CT vs MR:

pro/com

CT :

Rapid (7 seconds) movement, cooperation  Freely reformattable Windows ex post facto

MR :

No radiation Contrast rxn. v. rare Superb soft tx. info.

Superb resolution Contrast rxn. rare Metal can be imaged “WYSIWYG” per sequence Much slower (45-90 min) Claustrophobic Metal = abs. contraindx, 2x High-dose radiation Metal can degrade image Expensive (~2x CT) Expensive but ~$1/2 MR Less resolution

Weight, size limits: both

CT vs MR: What is the Question?

CT

: “4 Bs” radiodense Bone Blood (

acute

hemorrhage) Bullets and metal 

MR

: Soft tx – ligament, muscle, tendon, cartilage, muscle, neural, tumor Molecular differences Barium ( ie contrast) Better soft tissue detail Lung and chest Direct multiplanar Cancer staging Speed overcomes motion

Non-polar

materials not visualized ie, bone (calcium).

<-- CT MR

CT MR

US: When and Where?

MSK: Currently limited in adults; rapidly changing PRO

    :

CON:

Portable 

Fat, bone, air, metal,

Safe (no dose no risk), Far less expensive 

all block US Low resolution

GYN, Doppler flow 

Highly user-dependent

Echocardiograph 

Non-intuitive (‘weather maps’)

RUQ abdomen  Bx, line placement,‘taps’ (pleural, abscess, joints)  DVT: proximal extremities  Breast: cyst vs solid

US: Soft tissue, Flow

Barriers: Bone, Fat, metal, air… Rheumatoid arthritis. Gutierrez M et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1111-1114

©2011 by BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and European League Against Rheumatism

ACR AC American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria www.acr.org

Evidence-based guidelines

to choose imaging 200 Dx with 900 scenarios/variants; referenced  

Relative Radiation Risk

each study

Modality guidelines

CT, MR, US, Nucs , PET,… 

Practice Guidelines

: When (in what order) to perform: Radiography, CT, MR of the extremities Spine Radiography, CT, MR Scoliosis radiography (Portable chest, Abdominal radiography, hysterosalpingograms, Dxc Ct, Pediatric CT, Ct colonoscopy, MR knee, MR brain, US, …)

Varied Clinical Scenarios per DDx

 200 Dx with 900 variants (modifiers) ; eg: Blunt Chest Trauma : 3 variations per clinical/XR Acute hip pain, suspected fx.: 2 variations, 4 pgs discussion Acute shoulder pain Chronic wrist pain Chronic neck pain Imaging after arthroplasty (joint replacement) Non-traumatic knee pain Soft tissue masses Suspected avascular necrosis

“Acute Shoulder Pain”

Initial =s XR, then branches into detailed specifics

 Acute shoulder pain (leave choice of initial XR views to us) ‘Any etiology, initial study’: XR=9(best) ; CT, MR, US=1(worst) ‘XR neg, significant persistant pain’  MR (9) ; CT (5) ‘XR neg, under 35, suspect labral tear’  MR arthrog(9 ), MR(7), CT(5) ‘XR neg, prior rotator cuff repair, suspect re-tear ‘  MR (9) w. or w/o ‘XR neg, suspect septic arthritis’  arthrocentesis (9) , MR w&w/o (7)    Jumping straight to sophisticated imaging = mistake.

Short cuts, ‘time-savers’, pervert accurate diagnosis.

Radiography (‘plain film”) NOT going away!

“LOW BACK PAIN”

80% of over-45 yo

     “Uncomplicated, no red flags (explained) ”: All imaging = ‘2’ ‘With radiculopathy, surg. candidate”  MR w/o (8); CT (5) “Low-veloc trauma, osteoporosis, focal/progressive deficit, prolonged sx,

or

>70 yo ”  XR then MR “Possible cancer, infection, and/or known immunosuppression ” -> MR w&w/o (8); MR w/o (7); CT(6); “Prior lumbar surgery”  MR w&w/o (8); MR w/o (6) CT (6)  By the time you straighten this out… Standard of Care (SOC) may have changed again

EPIPHANY: One need not understand physics to request proper exam

  Understand

what

each modality can/cannot do, not ‘why’, nor ‘how’.

Use resources – ACR AC, Radiologists– to confirm appropriate next-step.

 RESOURCES constant, ANSWERS change often.   Commonly used studies will become familiar. Less common….won’t. Don’t worry.

ASK US!

http://3rads.jhmi.edu/

All imaging phone numbers

When

to use contrast,

what

study to get, can be counter-intuitive and subtle.

 Include us on the patient care team; we are

CONSULTANTS

, not lab techs. 

On-call techs, all modalities/subspecialties: use 3Rads.jhmi.edu

Back-up: ask Emed Radiology Resident 7-5442

Dxc. Imaging: TTW 2014

“REPETITION IS THE KEY TO LEARNING”

Intro to Chest Radiographs: The Ur-unit of imaging

Thank you!

Donna Magid, MD, M.Ed