Charles Kim

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rates of intravascular ultrasound (US)-guided transvenous biopsy (TVB) versus those of computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous needle biopsy (PNB) for retroperitoneal (RP) lymph nodes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-institution, retrospective study, 32 intravascular US-guided TVB procedures and a sample of 34 CT-guided PNB procedures for RP lymph nodes where targets were deemed amenable to intravascular US-guided TVB were analyzed. Procedural metrics, including diagnostic accuracy, defined as diagnostic of malignancy or a clinically verifiable benign result, and adverse event rates were compared. RESULTS: The targets of intravascular US-guided TVB were primarily aortocaval (47%, 15/32) or precaval (34%, 11/32), whereas those of CT-guided PNB were primarily right pericaval (44%, 15/34) or retrocaval (44%, 15/34) (P < .001). The targets of intravascular US-guided TVB averaged 2.4 cm in the long axis (range, 1.3-3.7 cm) compared with 2.9 cm (range, 1.4-5.7 cm) for those of CT-guided PNB (P = .02). There was no difference in the average number of needle passes (3.8 for intravascular US-guided TVB vs 3.9 for CT-guided PNB; P = .68). The diagnostic accuracy was 94% (30/32) and the adverse event rate was 3.1% (1/32) for intravascular US-guided TVB, similar to those of CT-guided PNB (accuracy, 91% [31/34]; adverse event rate, 2.9% [1/34]). CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular US-guided TVB had a diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rate similar to CT-guided PNB for RP lymph nodes, indicating that intravascular US-guided TVB may be as safe and effective as conventional biopsy approaches for appropriately selected targets.

As the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and subsequent treatments with liver-directed therapies rise, the complexity of assessing lesion response has also increased. The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (LI-RADS) treatment response algorithm (LI-RADS TRA) was created to standardize the assessment of response after locoregional therapy (LRT) on contrast-enhanced CT or MRI. Originally created based on expert opinion, these guidelines are currently undergoing revision based on emerging evidence. While many studies support the use of LR-TRA for evaluation of HCC response after thermal ablation and intra-arterial embolic therapy, data suggest a need for refinements to improve assessment after radiation therapy. In this manuscript, we review expected MR imaging findings after different forms of LRT, clarify how to apply the current LI-RADS TRA by type of LRT, explore emerging literature on LI-RADS TRA, and highlight future updates to the algorithm. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

The treatment and management of hepatic malignancies can be complex because it encompasses a variety of primary and metastatic malignancies and an assortment of local and systemic treatment options. When to use each of these treatments is critical to ensure the most appropriate care for patients. Interventional radiologists have a key role to play in the delivery of a variety of liver directed treatments including percutaneous ablation, transarterial embolization with bland embolic particles alone, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with injection of a chemotherapeutic emulsion, and transarterial radioembolization (TARE). Based on 9 clinical variants, the appropriateness of each treatment is described in this document. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a cosmesis scale to evaluate the cosmetic appearance of hemodialysis (HD) arteriovenous (AV) accesses from the perspective of the patient and clinician, which could be incorporated into clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN: Using a modified Delphi process, two AV access cosmesis scale (AVACS) components were developed in a four-round Delphi panel consisting of two surveys and two consensus meetings with two rounds of patient consultation. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Delphi panel consisted of 15 voting members including five interventional or general nephrologists, five vascular surgeons, three interventional radiologists, and two vascular access nurse coordinators. Four patients experienced with vascular access were involved in patient question development. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: For a component to be included in the AVACS, it had to meet the prespecified panel consensus agreement of ⩾70%. RESULTS: The clinician component of the AVACS includes nine questions on the following AV access features: scarring, skin discoloration, aneurysm/pseudoaneurysms and megafistula appearance. The patient component includes six questions about future vascular access decisions, interference with work or leisure activities, clothing choices, self-consciousness or attractiveness, emotional impact, and overall appearance. LIMITATIONS: Delphi panel methods are subjective by design, but with expert clinical opinion are used to develop classification systems and outcome measures. The developed scale requires further validation testing but is available for clinical trial use. CONCLUSIONS: While safety and efficacy are the primary concerns when evaluating AV access for HD, cosmesis is an important component of the ESKD patient experience. The AVACS has been designed to assess this important domain; it can be used to facilitate patient care and education about vascular access choice and maintenance. AVACS can also be used to inform future research on developing new techniques for AV access creation and maintenance, particularly as relates to AV access cosmesis.