Bollblevins6244

The imaging techniques, use of this imaging, and associated tissue doses are described. Imaging can contribute a few percent to the planned treatment doses (which are prescribed to specified target volumes) as well as exposing patients to radiation outside of the target volume (in the imaging field of view). PURPOSE The objective of this study was to survey current trends in supplemental screening across various practice types and to understand factors that affect these practice patterns. METHODS In this institutional review board-exempt study, a 12-question survey was sent out to ACR lead interpreting physicians. The survey inquired about practice features and the utilization of supplemental screening. RESULTS A total of 902 of 4,688 lead interpreting breast imaging physicians (19.2%) responded to our survey. Of those respondents, 617 respondents (68.4%) worked in practices that offered supplemental breast cancer screening. Screening ultrasound was the most commonly utilized supplemental screening modality (53%). There was variability in methods of referral for supplemental screening, with referral through the ordering provider (56%) being the most common. Academic practices, private practices with breast specialization, and practices in the Northeast were more likely to provide supplemental screening (P less then .05). 2 inhibitor There were significant relationships between the presence of state density notification legislation, the number of breast imaging trained radiologists, and the volume of mammographic studies performed per day and the availability of supplemental screening (P less then .05). The use of automated breast density assessment software and patient education brochures about density and supplemental screening also had significant relationships with the availability of supplemental screening (P less then .05). CONCLUSIONS The majority of practices surveyed are utilizing supplemental screening, but there is significant variability in the modalities used and the methods of referral. There are practice features that correlate with the availability of supplemental screening, and understanding these features provides further insight into current trends in supplemental screening utilization. PURPOSE After the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments timeline and guidelines were released for the 2021 through 2022 fellowship application cycle, the Society of Abdominal Radiology conducted a survey of residents, fellows, and abdominal imaging fellowship program directors (PDs) to assess stakeholders' perceptions of changes in the fellowship application process. METHODS Eligible study participants included fellowship PDs of all US abdominal imaging programs and Society of Abdominal Radiology members-in-training. A questionnaire was developed by content and survey experts, pilot-tested, and administered from August to October 2019. RESULTS Survey response rates were 51.4% among PDs (54 of 103) and 24.2% among trainees (67 of 279), with an overall response rate of 31.8%. Attitudes regarding the abdominal imaging fellowship application process were overall similar between PDs and trainees, including expressed support for a common application. Although trainees and PDs agreed that the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments 2021 through 2022 cycle timeline is preferable to the prior unstructured system, only 42.4% of PDs and 40.7% of trainees supported moving to a formal match, with a significant number of respondents undecided. Both PDs and trainees favored timing fellowship interviews during the fall of the third year of residency (R3 year), with a 1- to 2-month buffer between the start of interviews and offers. CONCLUSIONS PDs and trainees demonstrate similar attitudes in support of the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments 2021 through 2022 cycle timeline and a common abdominal imaging fellowship application. Shifting the interview season from winter to fall of R3 year could be considered to meet the preferences of PDs and trainees alike. Moving to a formal match remains controversial. BACKGROUND A cluster of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were successively reported in Wuhan, China. We aimed to describe the CT findings across different timepoints throughout the disease course. METHODS Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia (confirmed by next-generation sequencing or RT-PCR) who were admitted to one of two hospitals in Wuhan and who underwent serial chest CT scans were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were grouped on the basis of the interval between symptom onset and the first CT scan group 1 (subclinical patients; scans done before symptom onset), group 2 (scans done ≤1 week after symptom onset), group 3 (>1 week to 2 weeks), and group 4 (>2 weeks to 3 weeks). Imaging features and their distribution were analysed and compared across the four groups. FINDINGS 81 patients admitted to hospital between Dec 20, 2019, and Jan 23, 2020, were retrospectively enrolled. The cohort included OVID-19 pneumonia manifests with chest CT imaging abnormalities, even in asymptomatic patients, with rapid evolution from focal unilateral to diffuse bilateral ground-glass opacities that progressed to or co-existed with consolidations within 1-3 weeks. Combining assessment of imaging features with clinical and laboratory findings could facilitate early diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. FUNDING None. Among diverse stalked barnacles, Rugilepas pearsei (Thoracica Cirripedia Arthropoda) is a rare unique species that is associated with echinoids and has highly atrophied cirri. We rediscovered the barnacle for the first time from description and verified that the barnacles live obligately in half-open galls formed on the test of the sea urchin Echinothrix diadema (Diadematidae Echinodermata). A molecular phylogenetic analysis demonstrated that the obligate association with echinoids derived from epizoic life on crustaceans. A stable isotope analysis suggests that the barnacle feeds on particulate organic matter (POM) without parasitizing the host echinoids. These findings suggest that the host shift caused losses of plates and feather-like cirri, changes in the attachment device from cementation to anchoring, and a shift in feeding mode from filter feeding to POM collection. The barnacle's epizoic, superficially sub-endozoic, communal life in stout but narrow galls causes repetitive reproduction at the cost of reduced growth.