OBJECTIVE: To formulate strategies for clinical assessments for endometrial thickening on ultrasound in a postmenopausal woman without bleeding.
METHODS: Postmenopausal women of any age.
RESULTS: To reduce unnecessary invasive interventions and investigations in women with asymptomatic endometrial thickening while selectively investigating women at risk for endometrial cancer.
RESULTS: It is anticipated that the adoption of these recommendations would save postmenopausal women unnecessary anxiety, pain, and risk of procedural complications. It is also expected to decrease the cost to the health care system by eliminating unnecessary interventions.
METHODS: English language articles from Medline, Cochrane, and PubMed databases for relevant peer-reviewed articles dating from 1995 to 2022 (e.g., asymptomatic endometrial thickness, endometrial cancer, postmenopausal bleeding, transvaginal ultrasound, endometrial biopsy, cervical stenosis, hormone therapies and the endometrium, tamoxifen, tibolone, aromatase inhibitors). Results were restricted to systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies.
METHODS: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).
UNASSIGNED: Physicians, including gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, radiologists, pathologists, and internists; nurse practitioners and nurses; medical trainees, including medical students, residents, and fellows; and other providers of health care of the postmenopausal population.
UNASSIGNED: Postmenopausal women often have a thickening of the lining of the uterus found during ultrasound. Without bleeding, an endometrium <11 mm is rarely a serious problem but should be evaluated by a health care provider.

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common GI diagnosis leading to hospitalization within the United States. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of GI bleeding is critical to improving patient outcomes and reducing high healthcare utilization and costs. Radiologic techniques including computed tomography angiography, catheter angiography, computed tomography enterography, magnetic resonance enterography, nuclear medicine red blood cell scan, and technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy (Meckel scan) are frequently used to evaluate patients with GI bleeding and are complementary to GI endoscopy. However, multiple management guidelines exist which differ in the recommended utilization of these radiologic examinations. This variability can lead to confusion as to how these tests should be used in the evaluation of GI bleeding. In this document, a panel of experts from the American College of Gastroenterology and Society of Abdominal Radiology provide a review of the radiologic examinations used to evaluate for GI bleeding including nomenclature, technique, performance, advantages, and limitations. A comparison of advantages and limitations relative to endoscopic examinations is also included. Finally, consensus statements and recommendations on technical parameters and utilization of radiologic techniques for GI bleeding are provided.

BACKGROUND: Children undergoing diagnostic and interventional radiology procedures often require sedation to achieve immobility and analgesia if the procedure is painful. In the past decades, leading scientific organizations have developed evidence-based guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in children outside of the operating room. Their recommendations are being applied to procedural sedation in radiology. However, some questions remain open regarding specific aspects contextualized to the radiology setting, such as elective prone sedation, the urgency of the procedure, when venous access or airway protection is required, and others.
OBJECTIVE: To address the unresolved issues of procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology.
METHODS: An expert panel of pediatricians, pediatric anesthesiologists, intensivists, and neuroradiologists selected topics representative of current controversies and formulated research questions. Statements were developed by reviewing the literature for new evidence, comparing expertise and experience, and expressing opinions. Panelists\' agreement with the statements was collected anonymously using the DELPHI method.
RESULTS: Twelve evidence-based or expert opinion incorporate are presented, considering risks, benefits, and applicability.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus document, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts involved in the field, provides statements to improve the quality of decision-making practice in procedural sedation and analgesia in pediatric radiology.

The Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) Cardiovascular Expert Panel is made up of physicians from the disciplines of radiology, cardiology, and emergency medicine, a patient advisor, and an epidemiologist/guideline methodologist. After developing a list of 30 clinical/diagnostic scenarios, a rapid scoping review was undertaken to identify systematically produced referral guidelines that provide recommendations for one or more of these clinical/diagnostic scenarios. Recommendations from 48 guidelines and contextualization criteria in the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) for guidelines framework were used to develop 125 recommendation statements across the 30 scenarios (27 unique scenarios as 2 scenarios point to the CAR Thoracic Diagnostic Imaging Referral Guideline and the acute pericarditis subscenario is included under 2 main scenarios). This guideline presents the methods of development and the referral recommendations for acute chest pain syndromes, chronic chest pain, cardiovascular screening and risk stratification, pericardial syndromes, intracardiac/pericardial mass, suspected valvular disease cardiomyopathy, aorta, venous thrombosis, and peripheral vascular disease.

暂无摘要。

Following the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) joint guidelines (2018) for the management of patients with cervical cancer, treatment decisions should be guided by modern imaging techniques. After five years (2023), an update of the ESGO-ESTRO-ESP recommendations was performed, further confirming this statement. Transvaginal/transrectal ultrasound (TRS/TVS) or pelvic magnetic resonance (MRI) enables tumor delineation and precise assessment of its local extent, including the evaluation of the depth of infiltration in the bladder- or rectal wall. Additionally, both techniques have very high specificity to confirm the presence of metastatic pelvic lymph nodes but fail to exclude them due to insufficient sensitivity to detect small-volume metastases, as in any other currently available imaging modality. In early-stage disease (T1a to T2a1, except T1b3) with negative lymph nodes on TVS/TRS or MRI, surgicopathological staging should be performed. In all other situations, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with CT (PET-CT) is recommended to assess extrapelvic spread. This paper aims to review the evidence supporting the implementation of diagnostic imaging with a focus on ultrasound at primary diagnostic workup of cervical cancer.

暂无摘要。

The Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) Head and Neck Expert Panel consists of radiologists, a laryngologist and laryngeal surgeon, a patient advisor, and an epidemiologist/guideline methodologist. After developing a list of 11 clinical/diagnostic scenarios, a systematic rapid scoping review was undertaken to identify systematically produced referral guidelines that provide recommendations for one or more of these clinical/diagnostic scenarios. Recommendations from 17 guidelines and contextualization criteria in the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) for guidelines framework were used to develop 26 recommendation statements across the 11 scenarios. This guideline presents the methods of development and the referral recommendations for sinus disease, tinnitus, thyroid and parathyroid disease, neck mass of unknown origin, acute sialadenitis, chronic salivary conditions, and temporomandibular joint dysfunction.

The Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) Gastrointestinal Expert Panel consists of radiologists, a gastroenterologist, a general surgeon, a family physician, a patient advisor, and an epidemiologist/guideline methodologist. After developing a list of 20 clinical/diagnostic scenarios, a systematic rapid scoping review was undertaken to identify systematically produced referral guidelines that provide recommendations for one or more of these clinical/diagnostic scenarios. Recommendations from 58 guidelines and contextualization criteria in the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) for guidelines framework were used to develop 85 recommendation statements specific to the adult population across the 20 scenarios. This guideline presents the methods of development and the referral recommendations for dysphagia/dyspepsia, acute nonlocalized abdominal pain, chronic abdominal pain, inflammatory bowel disease, acute gastrointestinal bleeding, chronic gastrointestinal bleeding/anemia, abnormal liver biopsy, pancreatitis, anorectal diseases, diarrhea, fecal incontinence, and foreign body ingestion.

暂无摘要。