Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Four-dimensional parathyroid computed tomography (4DCT) is a relatively new parathyroid imaging technique that provides functional and highly detailed anatomic information about parathyroid tumors.

Objective: To assess the accuracy of 4DCT for the preoperative localization of parathyroid adenomas (PTAs) in patients with biochemically confirmed primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) and a history of failed surgery or unsuccessful localization using ^99mTc-sestamibi scanning and ultrasonography.

Methods: Between January 2013 and January 2015, 55 patients with PHPT underwent 4DCT at Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel. An initial unenhanced scan was followed by an IV contrast injection of nonionic contrast material (120 ml of at 4 ml/s). Scanning was repeated 25, 60, and 90 seconds after the initiation of IV contrast administration. An experienced radiologist blinded to the earlier imaging results reviewed the 4DCT for the presence and location (quadrant) of the suspected PTAs. At the time of the study, 28 patients had undergone surgical exploration following 4DCT and we compared their scans with the surgical findings.

Results: 4DCT accurately localized 96% (27/28) of abnormal glands, all of which were hypervascular and showed characteristic rapid enhancement on 4DCT that could be distinguished from Level II lymph nodes. Surgery found hypovascular cystic PTA in one patient who produced a negative 4DCT scan. All patients had solitary PTAs. The scan at 90 seconds provided no additional information and was abandoned during the study.

Conclusions: 4DCT accurately localized hypervascular parathyroid lesions and distinguished them from other tissues. A three-phase scanning protocol may suffice.

Background: Plain abdominal radiographs are still performed as a first imaging examination to evaluate abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED), despite uncertainty regarding their utility.

Objectives: To describe the frequency and outcomes of the use of plain abdominal radiographs in the diagnosis of patients presenting with acute non-traumatic abdominal pain in the ED of a medical center. 

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain during a 6 month period. Further imaging (computed tomography, ultrasonography), when performed, was compared with the abdominal radiography. 

Results: Of 573 consecutive patients, 300 (52%) underwent abdominal radiography. Findings were normal in 88% (n=264), non-specific in 7.3% (n=22), and abnormal in 4.7% (n=14). For those with normal results, no further imaging was ordered for 43% (114/264). Of the 57% (150/264) who had follow-up imaging, 65% (98/150) showed abnormal findings. In 9 (3%) of the 300 patients, abdominal radiography identified bowel perforations and obstructions, and treatment was provided without the need for further radiologic examination.

Conclusions: The use of plain abdominal radiography is still common despite the high rate of false positive results. Efforts are needed to decrease the indiscriminate use of radiography in patients presenting with abdominal symptoms.

 

Background: Evidence suggests that prolonged bisphosphonate (BP) treatment predisposes to atypical fractures (AF), but the etiology has yet to be determined. Addressing causality begins with case identification, which requires radiological adjudication. However, many trials based their case findings on coded diagnoses. 

Objectives: To investigate the feasibility of case findings by the coding system and the reproducibility of radiological evaluations in two hospitals in Israel, and to compare BP exposure of AF patients to a control group with typical (intertrochanteric of femoral neck) fractures. 

Methods: Diagnostic databases from 2007–2010 were reviewed and admission X-rays of patients were examined in two steps by two radiologists. Fractures were classified as atypical or not atypical according to published criteria. A 2:1 control group was created. Ambulatory drug acquisition was reviewed. 

Results: Of the 198 patients who fulfilled the search criteria, 38 were classified by initial radiological opinion as AF. Subsequent radiological opinion judged 16 as not atypical. Of the AF patients, 80% were exposed to BP. Of those, 81% continued to receive BP treatment for 2.4 years after AF. Only one AF patient was discharged with suspected AF diagnosis. In the control group, 27% were exposed to BP prior to fracture (P < 0.001). 

Conclusions: Thorough radiological revision is mandatory for proper classification of AF, and even when performed there is significant inconsistency in interpretation. Conclusions drawn from trials based solely on coded diagnoses lead to significant bias. BP exposure was significantly higher in the AF group. Caregiver unawareness of AF leads to improper management.