B Julie He1, Brian J Malm1,2, Michelle Carino2, Mehran M Sadeghi3,4,5. 1. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. 2. Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA. 3. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. mehran.sadeghi@yale.edu. 4. Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA. mehran.sadeghi@yale.edu. 5. Yale Cardiovascular Research Center, 300 George Street #770G, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA. mehran.sadeghi@yale.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) often employs attenuation-correction computed tomography (CTAC) to reduce attenuation artifacts and improve specificity. While there is no specific guideline on how they should be reported, incidental noncardiac findings identified on these scans may be clinically significant. The prevalence of these findings in veterans is not currently known. In addition, variability in reporting these findings may depend on the interpreting physician's specialty. METHODS: To guide future decision-making, CTACs in veterans referred for MPI were prospectively evaluated in a quality-control project for a set of prespecified actionable incidental findings by cardiologists and a radiologist. RESULTS: On the 771 scans performed over eight months, 285 incidental noncardiac findings were identified by the interpreting cardiologists and 378 were identified by the interpreting radiologist. Pulmonary nodules were the most common occurring in 20% of studies read by the radiologist. Interreader agreements between cardiologists and the radiologist were poor for pulmonary nodules ≥ 10 mm and hiatal hernias; fair for pulmonary nodules < 10 mm, extracardiac masses, and aortic aneurysms; and moderate for pleural plaques. CONCLUSION: Incidental noncardiac findings on CTACs are common in our veteran population. Overall interobserver agreement in identifying these findings between cardiologists and radiologists is fair. Specific guidelines are needed on how CTACs should be read and reported.
BACKGROUND: Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) often employs attenuation-correction computed tomography (CTAC) to reduce attenuation artifacts and improve specificity. While there is no specific guideline on how they should be reported, incidental noncardiac findings identified on these scans may be clinically significant. The prevalence of these findings in veterans is not currently known. In addition, variability in reporting these findings may depend on the interpreting physician's specialty. METHODS: To guide future decision-making, CTACs in veterans referred for MPI were prospectively evaluated in a quality-control project for a set of prespecified actionable incidental findings by cardiologists and a radiologist. RESULTS: On the 771 scans performed over eight months, 285 incidental noncardiac findings were identified by the interpreting cardiologists and 378 were identified by the interpreting radiologist. Pulmonary nodules were the most common occurring in 20% of studies read by the radiologist. Interreader agreements between cardiologists and the radiologist were poor for pulmonary nodules ≥ 10 mm and hiatal hernias; fair for pulmonary nodules < 10 mm, extracardiac masses, and aortic aneurysms; and moderate for pleural plaques. CONCLUSION: Incidental noncardiac findings on CTACs are common in our veteran population. Overall interobserver agreement in identifying these findings between cardiologists and radiologists is fair. Specific guidelines are needed on how CTACs should be read and reported.
Authors: João V Vitola; Leslee J Shaw; Adel H Allam; Pilar Orellana; Amalia Peix; Annare Ellmann; Kevin C Allman; B N Lee; Chanika Siritara; Felix Y J Keng; Gianmario Sambuceti; Marla C Kiess; Raffaele Giubbini; Salaheddine E Bouyoucef; Zuo-Xiang He; Gregory S Thomas; Fernando Mut; Maurizio Dondi Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2009-07-22 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Vasken Dilsizian; James A Arrighi; Rose S Cohen; Todd D Miller; Allen J Solomon; James E Udelson Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Peter L Tilkemeier; Jamieson Bourque; Rami Doukky; Rupa Sanghani; Richard L Weinberg Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Leah L Zullig; Kellie J Sims; Rebecca McNeil; Christina D Williams; George L Jackson; Dawn Provenzale; Michael J Kelley Journal: Mil Med Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Alexander Goehler; Pamela M McMahon; Heidi S Lumish; Carol C Wu; Vidit Munshi; Michael Gilmore; Jonathan H Chung; Brian B Ghoshhajra; Daniel Mark; Quynh A Truong; G Scott Gazelle; Udo Hoffmann Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-07-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mouaz H Al-Mallah; Timothy M Bateman; Kelley R Branch; Andrew Crean; Eric L Gingold; Randall C Thompson; Sarah E McKenney; Edward J Miller; Venkatesh L Murthy; Koen Nieman; Todd C Villines; Michael V Yester; Andrew J Einstein; John J Mahmarian Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 3.872