scholarly journals Is routine preoperative chest X-ray: An underutilized tool in asymptomatic patients!

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 460
Author(s):  
Swati Jindal ◽  
Satinder Gombar ◽  
Kompal Jain
Keyword(s):  
X Ray ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Preoperative Chest

Routine Chest X-ray Examination?

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 859-860
Author(s):  
David H. Baker ◽  
Walter E. Berdon
Keyword(s):  
Age Group ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Routine Chest ◽  
Preoperative Chest

In reference to the article by Sane et al. entitled "Value of Preoperative Chest X-ray Examinations in Children" (Pediatrics 60:669, November 1977), we would like to know if the authors broke down the abnormalities by age group—for instance, five-year segments. If so, did a preponderance of abnormalities of any variety occur at any particular age? We believe that should be stated, as it would strengthen their thesis if there was no difference between 0 and 19 years of age.

FOREIGN BODY ASPIRATION IN CHILDREN: RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF PREOPERATIVE CHEST X-RAY

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (04) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rasha Nadeem Ahmed ◽  
Bassam Khaleel Al-abbasi ◽  
Nashwan M-Al Hafidh
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Body ◽  
Foreign Body Aspiration ◽  
Radiological Evaluation ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Preoperative Chest

Value of Preoperative Chest X-ray Examinations in Children

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. 669-672
Author(s):  
Shashikant M. Sane ◽  
Robert A. Worsing ◽  
Cornelius W. Wiens ◽  
Rajiv K. Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Anesthetic Technique ◽  
Chest Film ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Patients Âgés ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
A Prospective Study ◽  
Preoperative Chest

To assess the value of routine preoperative chest x-ray films in pediatric patients, a prospective study of 1,500 patients, ages newborn to 19 years, was undertaken. Of all the patients, 7.5% demonstrated at least one roentgenographic abnormality, with 4.7% of the patients demonstrating a totally unsuspected significant roentgenographic anomaly. In 3.8% of the patients, surgery was either postponed or cancelled or the anesthetic technique was altered as a result of the roentgenographic finding. It is believed that the routine preoperative chest film is justified if the film is evaluated before surgery and the results clinically followed up.

Posterior Thoracic Stab Wounds: Evaluating the Value of Commonly Used Radiologic Modalities

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 1363-1367
Author(s):  
William M. Brigode ◽  
Michael Masteller ◽  
Rishi Chaudhuri ◽  
Ryan Sullivan ◽  
Amir Vafa
Keyword(s):  
Injury Severity ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Stab Wounds ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Data Points ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Posterior Mediastinal ◽  
Stab Injuries

This study was performed to assess our institution's experience with stab injuries to the posterior mediastinal box. We examine the value of performing CT of the chest and esophagram in conjunction with a chest X-ray (CXR) over performing CXR(s) alone in evaluating this group of patients. We performed a retrospective study covering a 10-year period consisting of patients with stab wounds to the posterior mediastinal box. Age, gender, and injury severity score as demographic data points were collected. CXR, CT, and esophagram results; identified injuries; and subsequent interventions were analyzed. Of 78 patients who met the inclusion criteria, a total of 55 patients underwent esophagram, one had a false-positive result, and zero had their course altered by the study. Sixty-six patients underwent CT imaging, and there were nine missed findings on initial CXR. Five of these were clinically insignificant and the remaining four were managed with a chest tube alone. There were no tracheobronchial, esophageal, cardiac, or great vessel injuries. Hemodynamically stable, asymptomatic patients with stab wounds to the posterior mediastinal box do not require routine CT and esophagram in the absence of CXR and cardiac ultrasonographic abnormalities.

scholarly journals Estimation of the Overuse of Preoperative Chest X-rays According to “Choosing Wisely”, “No Hacer”, and “Essencial” Initiatives: Are They Equally Applicable and Comparable?

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (23) ◽  
pp. 8783
Author(s):  
Jorge Vicente-Guijarro ◽  
José Valencia-Martín ◽  
Paloma Moreno-Nunez ◽  
Pedro Ruiz-López ◽  
José Mira-Solves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Choosing Wisely ◽  
X Rays ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Relative Value ◽  
Wide Variability ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
American Society ◽  
Practice Methods ◽  
Preoperative Chest

Background: Overuse reduces the efficiency of healthcare systems and compromises patient safety. Different institutions have issued recommendations on the indication of preoperative chest X-rays, but the degree of compliance with these recommendations is unknown. This study investigates the frequency and characteristics of the inappropriateness of this practice. Methods: This is a descriptive observational study with analytical components, performed in a tertiary hospital in the Community of Madrid (Spain) between July 2018 and June 2019. The inappropriateness of preoperative chest X-ray tests was analyzed according to “Choosing Wisely”, “No Hacer” and “Essencial” initiatives and the cost associated with this practice was estimated in Relative Value and Monetary Units. Results: A total of 3449 preoperative chest X-ray tests were performed during the period of study. In total, 5.4% of them were unjustified according to the “No Hacer” recommendation and 73.3% according to “Choosing Wisely” and “Essencial” criteria, which would be equivalent to 5.6% and 11.8% of the interventions in which this test was unnecessary, respectively. One or more preoperative chest X-ray(s) were indicated in more than 20% of the interventions in which another chest X-ray had already been performed in the previous 3 months. A higher inappropriateness score was also recorded for interventions with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥ III (16.5%). The Anesthesiology service obtained a lower inappropriateness score than other Petitioning Surgical Services (57.5% according to “Choosing Wisely” and “Essencial”; 4.1% according to “No Hacer”). Inappropriate indication of chest X-rays represents an annual cost of EUR 52,122.69 (170.1 Relative Value Units) according to “No Hacer” and EUR 3895.29 (2276.1 Relative Value Units) according to “Choosing Wisely” or “Essencial” criteria. Conclusions: There was wide variability between the recommendations that directly affected the degree of inappropriateness found, with the main reasons for inappropriateness being duplication of preoperative chest X-rays and the lack of consideration of the particularities of thoracic interventions. This inappropriateness implies a significant expense according to the applicable recommendations and therefore a high opportunity cost.

scholarly journals Rare case of double aortic arch suspected by preoperative chest X-ray in a healthy woman

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (6) ◽  
pp. 1117-1118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Suzuki ◽  
Y. Nishikawa ◽  
D. Horiuchi ◽  
K. Semba ◽  
T. Fujii ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Arch ◽  
Rare Case ◽  
Healthy Woman ◽  
Double Aortic Arch ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Preoperative Chest

Value of preoperative chest X-ray examinations in children

1978 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 814
Author(s):  
Eugene H. Courtiss ◽  
S. M. Sane
Keyword(s):  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Preoperative Chest

scholarly journals MO846THE SPECTRUM OF CLINICAL AND SEROLOGICAL FEATURES OF COVID-19 IN URBAN HEMODIALYSIS PATIENTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Gomá-Garcés ◽  
Teresa Stock da Cunha ◽  
Alejandro Avello ◽  
Monica Pereira ◽  
Sebastian Mas-Fontao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Troponin I ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Limited Evidence ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Treatment Responses ◽  
Overall Mortality

Abstract Background and Aims The inherent immunosuppression of uremia increases the susceptibility of hemodialysis patients to infection. There is still limited evidence on hemodialysis patients and COVID-19. The clinical and analytical spectrum and treatment responses and mortality are poorly characterized. Method Clinical and analytical features, chest X-ray, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibodies for SARS-CoV-2, treatment and outcomes were analyzed in 48 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during March and April 2020 in two coordinated Spanish hemodialysis units. Results In 200 haemodialysis patients, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 48, of whom 22 were PCR positive, eight PCR negative but seroconverted and two were diagnosed on typical clinical grounds. Despite a mean age of 72.6 years, the overall mortality rate was 5/48 (10%). Among the PCR positive patients, 21 (55%) required admission and five (13%) died. PCR positive patients were more often symptomatic and hospitalized and had higher troponin I levels than PCR negative patients, but did not differ in lymphocyte counts, D-dimer or interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels. Among PCR negative COVID-19 patients, three out of 10 (30%) required admission, and none died. The most frequent symptom among the 48 patients was fever (31%), followed by asymptomatic patients (23%). A low number of lymphocytes was the only parameter significantly different between hospitalized and ambulatory COVID-19 patients, independently of PCR status. Conclusion COVID-19 hemodialysis patients are frequently asymptomatic, and mortality may be lower than previously reported. Diagnosis may be retrospective, based on seroconversion, as PCR may be negative. This information should guide preventive and patient isolation strategies.

scholarly journals THE PREOPERATIVE CHEST X-RAY

1974 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 558-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
I.H. KERR
Keyword(s):  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Preoperative Chest
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document