medigraphic.com
Órgano Oficial del Hospital Angeles Health System

2018, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Acta Med 2018; 16 (1)

Dubitative radiographic image: diagnosis modifications without and with patient’s clinical data

Domínguez GLG, Arellano AG, Harrison GC, Magaña RJ, Domínguez CLG

Language: Spanish
References: 40
Page: 7-14
PDF size: 266.04 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: It is reported that the average error rate on radiological interpretation of radiologists is 30%, with variability of 10% to 90%, especially when the Departments of Imaging do not receive clinical data. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic modifications of a “dubitative” image without and with contribution of clinical data. Material and methods: Interpretation of a radiological image of a clavicle lesion by 20 certified orthopedics and 20 certified radiologists. Providing a questionnaire with 3 sections; the first, without clinical data, the second, with clinical data, the third, providing laboratory and cabinet data. The Kendall concordance coefficient and Fisher exact test were applied. Results: In the first section, the option of pathological fracture predominated in both groups, in the second, the option of metastasis increased in 45% (p = 0.05) and high concordance of Kendall test. In the third, the osteoporosis fracture option increased by 50% (p = 0.05) with a Kendall concordance of 0.88. Conclusion: Every patient should be carefully investigated, including those with an apparently simple lesion, clinical and laboratory data should be provided to the imaging department to obtain a product that provides clinician assistance in decision making.


REFERENCES

  1. García NL, Cabello PR, Lever RC, Rosales ME, Padilla SR. Síndrome de VOMIT. Papel de la mala interpretación radiológica y qué podemos hacer para evitarlo. Trauma. 2006; 9 (1): 21-26.

  2. Sclafani S, Leidner B, Mattox K. The antiemetic panel. What is VOMIT? In: Trauma Org. [On Line] Radiology: Misreads (VOMIT): Aorta – antiemetic@trauma.org

  3. Berlin L. Communication of the urgent finding. AJR AM j Roentgenol. 1996; 166 (3): 513-515.

  4. Wakai A, Guly H. Diagnostic errors in an accident and emergency department. Emerg Med J. 2002; 19 (4): 374.

  5. Ortega TD, García MC. Prevención de riesgo en radiología: el error y el radiólogo. Rev Chil Radiol. 2002; 8: 135-140.

  6. Kendall MG. The treatment of ties in ranking problems. Biometrika. 1945; 33 (3): 239-251.

  7. Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11 (5): 452-456.

  8. Anderson K. Evaluation and treatment of distal clavicle fractures. Clin Sports Med. 2003; 22 (2): 319-326.

  9. Banerjee R, Waterman B, Padalecki J, Robertson W. Management of distal clavicle fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011; 19 (7): 392-401.

  10. Paladini P, Pellegrini A, Merolla G, Campi F. Treatment of clavicle fractures. Transl Med UniSa. 2012; 2: 47-58.

  11. Cho CH, Oh JH, Jung GH, Moon GH, Rhyou IH, Yoon JP et al. The interrater and intrarater agreement of a modified neer classification system and associated treatment choice for lateral clavicle fractures. Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 2431-2436.

  12. Jones GL, Bishop JY, Lewis B, Pedroza AD, Moon Shoulder Group. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in the classification and treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures. Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42 (5): 1176-1181.

  13. Kassarjian A, Llopis E, Palmer WE. Distal clavicular osteolysis: MR evidence for subchondral fracture. Skeletal Radiol. 2007; 36 (1): 17-22. [Medline].

  14. Patel AA, Ramanathan R, Kuban J, Willis HM. Imaging findings and evaluation of metabolic bone disease. Advances in Radiology. 2015, Article ID 812794, 2015. doi: 10.1155/2015/812794.

  15. Cosman F, De Beur SJ, LeBoff MS, Lewiecki EM, Tanner B, Randall S et al. Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014; 25 (10): 2359-2381.

  16. Schousboe JT, Shepherd JA, Bilezikian JP, Baim S. Executive summary of the 2013 International Society for Clinical Densitometry Position Development Conference on bone densitometry. J Clin Densitom. 2013; 16 (4): 455-466.

  17. Clark P, Carlos F, Martínez JL. Epidemiología, costos y carga de la osteoporosis en México. Rev Metab Óseo y Min. 2010; 8: 152-161.

  18. Cerdà D, Peris P, Monegal A, Albaladejo C, Martínez de Osaba MJ et al. Increase of PTH in post-menopausal osteoporosis. Rev Clin Esp. 2011; 211 (7): 338-343.

  19. Baixauli GF, Amaya VJ, Angulo SM, Baeza OJ, Fernandez SE, Mut OT. Estado actual de las metástasis óseas. Rev Esp Cir Osteoarticular. 2014; 49: 1-3.

  20. Van Poznak CH, Von Roenn JH, Temin S. American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on the role of bone-modifying agents in metastatic breast cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2011; 7 (2): 117-121.

  21. Wexler JA. Approach to the thyroid cancer patient with bone metastases. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011; 96 (8): 2296-2307.

  22. Durante C, Haddy N, Baudin E, Leboulleux S, Hartl D, Travagli JP et al. Long-term outcome of 444 patients with distant metastases from papillary and follicular thyroid carcinoma: benefits and limits of radioiodine therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006; 91 (8): 2892-2899.

  23. Coleman RE, Holen I. Bone metastasis. In: Abeloff MD et al. Clinical Oncology. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2007, pp. 739-762.

  24. Krishnamurthy A. Clavicle metastasis from carcinoma thyroid- an atypical skeletal event and a management dilemma. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2015; 6 (3): 267-270.

  25. Valenzuela P, Gaspar MJ, Tello E, Mateos S, Álvarez E, Holgado A. Utilidad del marcador CEA en el seguimiento del cáncer de mama. Rev Senología y Patol Mam. 2002; 15: 98-100.

  26. Spencer C, LoPresti J, Fatemi S. How sensitive (second-generation) thyroglobulin measurement is changing paradigms for monitoring patients with differentiated thyroid cancer, in the absence or presence of thyroglobulin autoantibodies. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2014; 21 (5): 394-404.

  27. Kapoor S, Tiwari A, Kapoor S. Primary tumours and tumorous lesions of clavicle. Int Orthop. 2008; 32 (6): 829-834.

  28. Smith J, Yuppa F, Watson RC. Primary tumors and tumor-like lesions of the clavicle. Skeletal Radiol. 1988; 17 (4): 235-246.

  29. Basarir K, Polat O, Saglik Y, Yildiz Y. Bone tumors of the clavicle: risk of malignancy in the elderly and safe needle biopsy. Orthopedics. 2010; 33 (6): 397.

  30. Ren K, Wu SJ, Shi X, Zhao J, Liu X. Primary clavicle tumors and tumorous lesions: a review of 206 cases in East Asia. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012; 132 (6): 883-889.

  31. Malik SS, Azad S, Malik S, Hing BC. Difficulty in diagnosing the pathological nature of an acute fracture of the clavicle: a case report. J Orthop Surg Res. 2009; 4: 21.

  32. García M. Anatomía del error en radiología. Rev Chil Radiol. 2003; 9 (3): 144-150.

  33. Bruno AM, Walker AE, Abujudeh HH. Understanding and confronting our mistakes: the epidemiology of error in radiology and strategies for error reduction. RadioGraphics. 2015; 35 (6): 1668-1676.

  34. Berlin L. Radiologic errors and malpractice: a blurry distinction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189 (3): 517-522.

  35. Brady A, Ó Laoide R, McCarthy P, McDermott R. Discrepancy and error in radiology: concepts, causes and consequences. Ulster Med J. 2012; 81 (1): 3-9.

  36. Goddard P, Leslie A, Jones A, Wakeley C, Kabala J. Error in radiology. Br J Radiol. 2001; 74 (886): 949-951.

  37. Jurgen LK, Krug BK. Avoiding error in radiology. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2013; 200 (1): W90-W90.

  38. Murphy JF. Root cause analysis of medical errors. Ir Med J. 2008; 101 (2): 36.

  39. Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H. Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology. 2016; 278 (2): 563-577.

  40. Jha S, Topol JE. Adapting to artificial intelligence radiologists and pathologists as information specialists. JAMA. 2016; 316 (22): 2353-2354. doi: 10.1001 /jama.2016.17438.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com