| Literature DB >> 33416922 |
HaiThuy N Nguyen1,2, Marla B K Sammer3,4, Matthew G Ditzler3,4, Lynn S Carlson3,4, Ray J Somcio3,4, Robert C Orth5, J Ruben Rodriguez6,7, Victor J Seghers3,4.
Abstract
Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33416922 PMCID: PMC7790938 DOI: 10.1007/s00247-020-04913-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pediatr Radiol ISSN: 0301-0449
Summary of the three key steps and corresponding tips for a successful roll-out of focused abdominal US as a first-line modality for midgut malrotation and volvulus
| Steps | Tips |
|---|---|
| Education | |
| Sonographers | • Publish imaging protocola • Add volvulus to pylorus and intussusception exams • Include volvulus protocol on competency checklist • Provide hands-on scanning sessions with live mock patient • Shadow sonographer and radiologist champions |
| Radiologists and trainees | • Create standardized report for checklist and consistency • Share cases via secure group chats and case conferences • Require self-directed on-line training module • Provide hands-on scanning sessions with live mock patient |
| Clinician buy-in | |
| Obtaining champions from key specialties | • Conduct face-to-face meetings with champions from the emergency, surgery and neonatology departments • Discuss positive US exams in real time, one-on-one • Show example cases in multidisciplinary conferences |
| Ensuring that the upper GI series is still performed in a timely manner | • Create order set to pair US with upper GI series to ensure the on-call radiologist is activated to perform the upper GI series, though upper GI might be cancelled pending US results |
| Quality assurance | |
| Obtaining preliminary data to support US | • Conduct literature review and synopsis • Perform pilot study for interrater reliability and feasibility with multiple sonographers |
| Tracking turnaround times and ordered exam types | • Identifies outliers in use of upper GI series • Ensures diagnosis is not slowed by using US |
| Keeping track of false negatives | • Automatically generated monthly surgical cases of midgut malrotation and volvulus from the EMR allow identification of potential false negatives • Separate radiology procedure code for the volvulus US allows for auto population of the standardized reporting template and database tracking |
EMR electronic medical record, GI gastrointestinal, US ultrasound
aOur institutional imaging protocol for midgut volvulus US appears in Table 2
Institutional imaging protocol for midgut volvulus ultrasound
| Technique | Notes |
|---|---|
| Probe | 15 L or 9 L; MSK setting preferred |
| Static images and cine clips | Transverse plane |
| 1. Entire view of SMA/SMV with and without color in dual screen | - Must scan to the top of the bladder, even if there is gas - Attempt to move gas by rolling patient - Look for “whirlpool” sign |
| 2. Pylorus and duodenal tip | Look for duodenal dilation |
| 3. Third portion of the duodenum | Should be located under the SMA and above the aorta |
| 4. Cecum with appendix | May be difficult to identify in infants |
MSK musculoskeletal, SMA superior mesenteric artery, SMV superior mesenteric vein
Fig. 1Malrotation and midgut volvulus algorithm at Texas Children’s Hospital starting in 2018. Of note, at the request of the General Surgery department, upper gastrointestinal series can still be performed in the presence of a positive US. AP anteroposterior, NPO nil per os, OR operating room, PEM pediatric emergency medicine, PRN pro re nata (when necessary), UGI upper gastrointestinal series
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for the three readers
| Question | ICC | 95% CI | ICC ratinga |
|---|---|---|---|
| Findings | |||
| Is there a whirlpool sign? | 0.88 | 0.79–0.93 | Excellent |
| Is the SMA/SMV normal? | 0.84 | 0.73–0.91 | Excellent |
| Is the proximal duodenum dilated? | 0.83 | 0.72–0.90 | Excellent |
| Is there a normal retroperitoneal third portion of the duodenum? | 0.73 | 0.57–0.84 | Good |
| Impression | |||
| Is there midgut volvulus? | 0.90b | 0.83–0.95 | Excellent |
CI confidence interval, SMA superior mesenteric artery, SMV superior mesenteric vein
aThe Cicchetti guidelines for interpreting kappa or ICC inter-rater agreement measures were used and interpreted as follows: less than 0.40 = poor, 0.40–0.59 = fair, 0.60–0.74 = good, 0.75–1.00 = excellent [20]
bAgreement and overall performance were best for the impression of midgut volvulus
Fig. 2Standardized template for volvulus US in our voice-recognition software (we do not rely on US for diagnosing malrotation. However, it is included in our report template because identifying malrotation is integral to recognizing midgut volvulus. Per the institutional algorithm, upper gastrointestinal series is to follow US performed for bilious emesis, unless US is positive for midgut volvulus). D3 third portion of the duodenum, SMA superior mesenteric artery, SMV superior mesenteric vein
Fig. 3Relative frequencies of after-hours exams performed for midgut volvulus, stratified by facility. At all campuses, after-hours upper gastrointestinal (GI) series is becoming less frequent, whereas volvulus US has become more frequently performed. However, this is most pronounced at the community hospitals where call-back is required for upper GI after-hours. *2020 includes all exams from January 1 through July 31, 2020, normalized to full year. Please note, the potential impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on these volumes is uncertain. UGI upper gastrointestinal series, US ultrasound
Types of exams performed on children with surgically corrected midgut volvulus imaged between January 2018 and April 2020 using the new imaging algorithm
| Location | Number | US only | US + upper GI series | % US only |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community | 11 | 5 | 6 | 45% |
| CH1a | 7 | 4 | 3 | 57% |
| CH2a | 4 | 1 | 3 | 25% |
| Medical Center | 5 | 3 | 2 | 60% |
| Total | 16 | 8 | 8 | 50% |
GI gastrointestinal
aCH1 and CH2 represent our two community pediatric hospitals and are subsets of “Community.” The relatively low numbers limit definitive conclusions but they suggest that CH2 is a location where additional efforts might be focused. Of note, CH2 lacks a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and is staffed by a heterogeneous group of physicians who rotate from the main teaching hospital, which might account for fewer cases overall and the lowest percentage of US-only diagnoses determining surgical disposition. In distinction, CH1 has a NICU and uses a dedicated physician staffing model