Objectives: Due to most states' legislation, mammographic density categorization has potentially far-reaching implications, but remains subjective based on BIRADS® guidelines. We aimed to determine 1) effect of BI-RADS® 5th edition (5th-ed) vs 4th-edition (4th-ed) guidelines on reader agreement regarding density assessment; 2) 5th-ed vs 4th-ed density distribution, and visual vs quantitative assessment agreement; 3) agreement between experienced vs less experienced readers.
Methods: In a retrospective review, six breast imaging radiologists (BIR) (23-30 years' experience) visually assessed density of 200 screening mammograms performed September 2012-January 2013 using 5th-ed guidelines.
Objective: To evaluate the impact of a new electronic procedural protocol on start times of pre-operative breast localization procedures.
Methods: This HIPAA-compliant, Institutional Review Board-exempted, quality improvement initiative was performed at a large tertiary academic center. In May 2018, an electronic version of the pre-procedure protocol for breast localizations was created within the electronic health record; prior to this time, the protocol was completed manually on a paper form.
Percutaneously implanted miniaturized devices such as fiducial markers, miniaturized sensors, and drug delivery devices have an important and expanding role in diagnosing and treating a variety of diseases. However, there is a need to develop and evaluate anchoring methods to ensure that these microdevices remain secure without dislodgement, as even minimal migration within tissues could result in loss of microdevice functionality or clinical complications. Here we describe two anchoring methods made from biocompatible materials: (1) a self-expanding nitinol mesh anchor and (2) self-expanding hydrogel particles contained within pliable netting.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: To evaluate perceptual difference in breast density classification using synthesized mammography (SM) compared with standard or full-field digital mammography (FFDM) for screening.
Materials And Methods: This institutional review board-approved, retrospective, multireader study evaluated breast density on 200 patients who underwent baseline screening mammogram during which both SM and FFDM were obtained contemporaneously from June 1, 2016, through November 30, 2016. Qualitative breast density was independently assigned by seven readers initially evaluating FFDM alone.
Increasing radiologic exam volume and complexity necessitates leveraging advanced hardware solutions to optimize workflow efficiency. We evaluated radiologist satisfaction of a programmable 13-button non-conventional mouse compared to a conventional three-button mouse in daily interpretation workflow following a brief 2-day trial period. A prospective study was conducted with radiology staff and residents in a tertiary care center from 2015 to 2016.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF