Literature DB >> 28427905

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Practices: Impact of the 2014 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

Evan J Zucker1, Alexander S Misono2, Anand M Prabhakar2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess changes in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) ultrasound screening associated with the release of revised U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on June 24, 2014.
METHODS: All AAA screening ultrasound examinations performed in the Massachusetts General Hospital radiology department in the 15 months before and after the new guidelines were retrospectively reviewed to assess changes in examination volume and appropriateness, demographics, aneurysm detection rate and size at diagnosis, frequency and type of incidental findings, and radiologist recommendations. Examinations were considered "definitely appropriate" if meeting USPSTF grade "B" evidence and "possibly appropriate" if meeting grade "C" or "I" evidence, based on available guidelines. Means were compared with the t test.
RESULTS: A total of 831 examinations were reviewed, 417 (50.2%) performed before and 414 (49.8%) after the new guidelines, with overall mean (SD) subject age 67.9 (6.8) years, 89.2% male. Appropriate examinations increased from 289 of 417 (69.3%) to 313 of 414 (75.6%) after the new guidelines (P = .04), mostly due to definitely appropriate examinations (253/417 [60.7%] versus 286/414 [69.1%], P = .01). Aneurysm detection rates increased from 23 of 417 (5.5%) to 39 of 414 (9.4%), P = .03. Mean (SD) aneurysm size (cm) at diagnosis decreased from 3.8 (0.7) to 3.3 (0.6), P = .01. Examination volume, demographics, and rates of incidentals and recommendations remained similar. Incidentals arose in 15.4% of all examinations, often iliac artery aneurysms or renal masses. Recommendations were made in 5.1%, mostly for cross-sectional imaging.
CONCLUSIONS: The revised USPSTF guidelines have been associated with increased AAA screening appropriateness and aneurysm detection in our practice, with smaller aneurysm size at diagnosis.
Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominal aortic aneurysm; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force; screening; smoker; ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28427905     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.02.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  4 in total

Review 1.  Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: concepts and controversies.

Authors:  Evan J Zucker; Anand M Prabhakar
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-04

Review 2.  Postoperative imaging of the aorta.

Authors:  Weier Li; Sasiprapa Rongthong; Anand M Prabhakar; Sandeep Hedgire
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-04

3.  Cell proliferation detected using [18F]FLT PET/CT as an early marker of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  Richa Gandhi; Christopher Cawthorne; Lucinda J L Craggs; John D Wright; Juozas Domarkas; Ping He; Joanna Koch-Paszkowski; Michael Shires; Andrew F Scarsbrook; Stephen J Archibald; Charalampos Tsoumpas; Marc A Bailey
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Screening Older Adult Men for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Priya Bains; John L Oliffe; Martha H Mackay; Mary T Kelly
Journal:  Am J Mens Health       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.