scholarly journals Cadaveric training workshops in musculoskeletal radiology: Are we there?

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 73-74
Author(s):  
Samaresh Sahu ◽  
R. S. Negi
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Radiology

scholarly journals Musculoskeletal Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: Quality Assessment of Initial MRI Reports Shows Frequent Deviation from ESSR Guidelines

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 695
Author(s):  
Sebastian Weiss ◽  
Alexander Korthaus ◽  
Nora Baumann ◽  
Jin Yamamura ◽  
Alexander S. Spiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcomas ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Final Diagnosis ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Radiology Reports ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
The Masses

Soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) are a rare subtype of soft-tissue mass and are frequently misinterpreted as benign lesions. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the primary recommended type of diagnostics. To assess the quality of primary radiology reports, we investigated whether recommended MRI report elements were included in compliance with European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) guidelines. A total of 1107 patients were evaluated retrospectively, and 126 radiological reports on patients with malignant STS were assessed for ESSR quality criteria. One or more required sequences or planes were missing in 67% of the reports. In all 126 cases, the report recognized the mass as anomalous (100%). Sixty-eight percent of the reports mentioned signs of malignancy. The majority of reports (n = 109, 87%) articulated a suspected diagnosis, 32 of which showed a mismatch with the final diagnosis (25%). Thirty-two percent of the reports had a misinterpretation of the masses as benign. Benign misinterpretations were more common in masses smaller than 5 cm (65% vs. 27%). Thirty percent of the reports suggested tissue biopsy and 6% recommended referral to a sarcoma center. MRI reports showed frequent deviations from ESSR guidelines, and protocol guidelines were not routinely met. Deviations from standard protocol and reporting guidelines could put patients at risk for inadequate therapy.

Present Status of Musculoskeletal Radiology in Europe: International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (03) ◽  
pp. 323-330
Author(s):  
Timea Hebar ◽  
Žiga Snoj ◽  
Luca Maria Sconfienza ◽  
Filip Maria H.M. Vanhoenacker ◽  
Maryam Shahabpour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Society ◽  
Interventional Procedures ◽  
National Level ◽  
International Survey ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Radiological Society ◽  
The Status ◽  
Structure Relationship ◽  
Academic Radiology

No official data exist on the status of musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology in Europe. The Committee for National Societies conducted an international survey to understand the status of training, subspecialization, and local practice among the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) partner societies. This article reports the results of that survey. An online questionnaire was distributed to all 26 European national associations that act as official partner societies of the ESSR. The 24 questions were subdivided into six sections: society structure, relationship with the national radiological society, subspecialization, present radiology practice, MSK interventional procedures, and MSK ultrasound. The findings of our study show a lack of standardized training and/or accreditation methods in the field of MSK radiology at a national level. The European diploma in musculoskeletal radiology is directed to partly overcome this problem; however, this certification is still underrecognized. Using certification methods, a more homogeneous European landscape could be created in the future with a view to subspecialist training. MSK ultrasound and MSK interventional procedures should be performed by a health professional with a solid knowledge of the relevant imaging modalities and sufficient training in MSK radiology. Recognition of MSK radiology as an official subspecialty would make the field more attractive for younger colleagues as well as attracting the brightest and best, an important key to further development of both clinical and academic radiology. Key Points

scholarly journals Glossary of terms for musculoskeletal radiology

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
William Palmer ◽  
Laura Bancroft ◽  
Fiona Bonar ◽  
Jung-Ah Choi ◽  
Anne Cotten ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Radiology

Assessing the readability of patient-targeted online information on musculoskeletal radiology procedures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phuong T. Duong ◽  
Matthew P. Moy ◽  
F. Joseph Simeone ◽  
Connie Y. Chang ◽  
Tony T. Wong
Keyword(s):  
Online Information ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology

scholarly journals Title: IDENTIFYING THE AXILLARY NERVE DURING SHOULDER SURGERY: AN ANATOMIC STUDY USING ADVANCED IMAGING

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0003
Author(s):  
Michael E. Hachadorian ◽  
Brendon C. Mitchell ◽  
Matthew Y. Siow ◽  
Wilbur Wang ◽  
Tracey Bastrom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Shoulder Surgery ◽  
Rotator Cuff Tears ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Reconstructive Procedures ◽  
Mri Studies

Background: The axillary nerve (AXN) is one of the more commonly injured nerves during shoulder surgery. Prior anatomic studies of the AXN in adults were performed using cadaveric specimens with small sample sizes. Our research observes a larger cohort of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies in order to gain a more representative sample of the course of the axillary nerve and aid surgeons intraoperatively. Methods: High-resolution 3T MRI studies performed at our institution from January 2010 to June 2019 were reviewed. Four blinded reviewers with musculoskeletal radiology or orthopaedic surgery training measured the distance of the AXN to the surgical neck of the humerus (SNH), the lateral tip of the acromion (LTA), and the inferior glenoid rim (IGR). Intra-class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess reliability between reviewers. The nerve location was assessed relative to rotator cuff tear status. Results: A total of 257 shoulder MRIs were included. ICC was excellent at 0.80 for SNH, 0.90 for LTA and 0.94 for IGR. All intra-observer reliabilities were above 0.80. Mean distance from AXN to SNH was 1.7 cm (0.7-3.1 cm, IQR 1.38-2.00) and AXN to IGR was 1.6 cm (0.6-2.6 cm, IQR 1.33-1.88). The mean AXN to LTA distance was 7.1 cm, with a range of 5.2 to 9.0 cm across patient heights; there was a large effect size related to LTA to AXN distance and patient height with a correlation of r=0.603, (p<0.001). Rotator cuff pathology appears to affect nerve location by increasing the distance between AXN and SNH (p = 0.027). Discussion/Conclusion: The AXN is vulnerable to injury during both open and arthroscopic shoulder procedures. This injury can be either a result of direct trauma to the nerve or secondary to traction placed on the nerve with reconstructive procedures that distalize the humerus. Our study demonstrates that the axillary nerve can be found as little as 5.6 mm from IGR and 6.9 mm from the SNH. Additionally, we illustrate the relationship between patient height and LTA to AXN distance and complete rotator cuff tears and SNH to AXN distance. Our study is the first to demonstrate the nerve’s proximity to important surgical landmarks of the shoulder using a large sample size of high-resolution images in living human shoulders. Tables/Figures: [Figure: see text][Table: see text]

Structured Reporting in Musculoskeletal Radiology

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (05) ◽  
pp. 641-645
Author(s):  
Ajay Kohli ◽  
Samantha Castillo ◽  
Uma Thakur ◽  
Avneesh Chhabra
Keyword(s):  
Manufacturing Industry ◽  
Service Industry ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Structured Reporting ◽  
Learning Approaches ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Future Data ◽  
Service Departments ◽  
And Training

AbstractMusculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists are predominantly consultants in the service departments of health care. Unlike the manufacturing industry, quality controls are difficult to institute in a service industry and more variability is expected. Structured reporting is a unique way to institute quality standards, and by using the checklist approach with uniform terminology, it can lead to more homogeneity and consistency of reporting, concise lexicon use within and across practices, minimization of errors, enhancement of divisional and departmental branding, improvement of interdisciplinary communications, and future data mining. We share our experience from more than a decade of structured reporting in the domain of MSK radiology, our practice standards, and how reporting has evolved in our MSK practice. Further discussions include future directions aided by machine learning approaches with augmented reality and the possibility of virtual fellowship and training using consistent lexicons and structured reporting.

Musculoskeletal radiology I

Imaging ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. vi-vi
Author(s):  
Simon Ostlere
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Radiology

scholarly journals The development of musculoskeletal radiology for 100 years as presented in the pages of Acta Radiologica

2021 ◽  
pp. 028418512110508
Author(s):  
Mats Geijer ◽  
Fatih Inci ◽  
Nektarios Solidakis ◽  
Pawel Szaro ◽  
Bariq Al-Amiry
Keyword(s):  
Functional Imaging ◽  
Tumor Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Joint Diseases ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Cross Sectional

During the last 100 years, musculoskeletal radiology has developed from bone-only radiography performed by everyone to a dedicated subspecialty, still secure in its origins in radiography but having expanded into all modalities of imaging. Like other subspecialties in radiology, it has become heavily dependent on cross-sectional and functional imaging, and musculoskeletal interventions play an important role in tumor diagnosis and treatment and in joint diseases. All these developments are reflected in the pages in Acta Radiologica, as shown in this review.

scholarly journals Artificial Intelligence in Musculoskeletal Radiology: Past, Present, and Future

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 89-96
Author(s):  
Mayur Pankhania
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Bone Tumors ◽  
Bone Fractures ◽  
Resolution Enhancement ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Musculoskeletal Radiology ◽  
Musculoskeletal Infection ◽  
The Past ◽  
Fracture Identification

Musculoskeletal radiology is an important tool for the diagnosis of muscle damage, bone fractures, bone tumors, musculoskeletal infection, and other diseases. However, all currently used radiological techniques, including radiography, ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging are associated with their own challenges. With its ability to address these challenges, artificial intelligence (AI) holds the promise to transform a musculoskeletal radiologist’s job in several areas. In the past, AI-based approaches in musculoskeletal radiology were primarily used for measuring bone mineral density or identifying bone tumors. However, recent studies have expanded the application of AI in several other areas, such as image segmentation, resolution enhancement, and fracture identification as well automatic diagnosis of other forms of musculoskeletal damage. This review article discusses numerous older as well as more recent studies to highlight how the development and application of AI-based approaches have evolved in the field of musculoskeletal radiology and how the applicability of these approaches may be improved in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document