OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic utility and net cost of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the management of clinically and sonographically inconclusive scrotal lesions. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review identified 34 patients diagnosed with scrotal MRI following inconclusive clinical and ultrasound (US) evaluation. Final diagnoses were based on surgery (n = 18) or clinical and US follow-up (n = 16). Final diagnoses of 29 testicular lesions were as follows: orchitis (n = 11), infarct (n = 6), neoplasm (n = 6), rupture (n = 3), torsion (n = 2), and radiation fibrosis (n = 1). Final diagnoses of five extratesticular lesions were as follows: epididymitis (n = 2), epididymal abscess (n = 2), and neoplasm (n = 1). Management plans prior to and following MRI findings were formulated by a general urologist and a urologic oncologist. The costs of the pre-MRI and post-MRI management plans were estimated using the Medicare reimbursement schedule. RESULTS: The leading US diagnosis was correct for 10 of 34 patients (29%) and the leading MRI diagnosis was correct for 31 of 34 patients (91%). MRI improved the management plan of the general urologist and urologic oncologist in 19 patients (56%) and 17 patients (50%), respectively. MRI worsened the management plan of both clinicians in 1 patient. Management was unchanged in all other patients. The overall net cost savings were $543 to $730 per patient for the urologic oncologist and the general urologist, respectively, and $3833 per patient originally scheduled for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Use of MRI after inconclusive clinical and US evaluation of scrotal lesions may improve management, decrease the number of surgical procedures, and result in net cost savings.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic utility and net cost of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the management of clinically and sonographically inconclusive scrotal lesions. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review identified 34 patients diagnosed with scrotal MRI following inconclusive clinical and ultrasound (US) evaluation. Final diagnoses were based on surgery (n = 18) or clinical and US follow-up (n = 16). Final diagnoses of 29 testicular lesions were as follows: orchitis (n = 11), infarct (n = 6), neoplasm (n = 6), rupture (n = 3), torsion (n = 2), and radiation fibrosis (n = 1). Final diagnoses of five extratesticular lesions were as follows: epididymitis (n = 2), epididymal abscess (n = 2), and neoplasm (n = 1). Management plans prior to and following MRI findings were formulated by a general urologist and a urologic oncologist. The costs of the pre-MRI and post-MRI management plans were estimated using the Medicare reimbursement schedule. RESULTS: The leading US diagnosis was correct for 10 of 34 patients (29%) and the leading MRI diagnosis was correct for 31 of 34 patients (91%). MRI improved the management plan of the general urologist and urologic oncologist in 19 patients (56%) and 17 patients (50%), respectively. MRI worsened the management plan of both clinicians in 1 patient. Management was unchanged in all other patients. The overall net cost savings were $543 to $730 per patient for the urologic oncologist and the general urologist, respectively, and $3833 per patient originally scheduled for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Use of MRI after inconclusive clinical and US evaluation of scrotal lesions may improve management, decrease the number of surgical procedures, and result in net cost savings.
Authors: Sasha Rachel Fehily; Jason Anthony Trubiano; Catriona McLean; Boon Wei Teoh; Jeremy Peter Grummet; Catherine Louise Cherry; Olga Vujovic Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2015 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Athina C Tsili; Michele Bertolotto; Ahmet Tuncay Turgut; Vikram Dogra; Simon Freeman; Laurence Rocher; Jane Belfield; Michal Studniarek; Alexandra Ntorkou; Lorenzo E Derchi; Raymond Oyen; Parvati Ramchandani; Mustafa Secil; Jonathan Richenberg Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Athina C Tsili; Michele Bertolotto; Laurence Rocher; Ahmet Tuncay Turgut; Vikram Dogra; Mustafa Seçil; Simon Freeman; Jane Belfield; Michal Studniarek; Alexandra Ntorkou; Lorenzo E Derchi; Raymond Oyen; Parvati Ramchandani; Subramaniyan Ramanathan; Jonathan Richenberg Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Guner Sonmez; Ali Kemal Sivrioglu; Murat Velioglu; Mehmet Incedayi; Hasan Soydan; Kemal Kara; Ferhat Ateş; Muzaffer Saglam Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2012-09-17 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Vasileios Rafailidis; Hasti Robbie; Eleni Konstantatou; Dean Y Huang; Annamaria Deganello; Maria E Sellars; Vito Cantisani; Andrea M Isidori; Paul S Sidhu Journal: Ultrasound Date: 2016-01-08