Medical Imaging : All Issues

One industry commentator recently warned of a ‘clash of responsibilities’ with some radiographers being trained and tasked with reading images, but Jonathon McNulty of University College Dublin believes this evolution could benefit the profession and ultimately patients.

A more controversial use of diagnostic imaging is discussed by Dr Amaka Offiah of Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust. One of the world’s leading researches in the field, Offiah argues that while imaging plays a key role in documenting child abuse radiologists aren’t receiving the support they need.

Dr Denise Aberle and Dr Christine Berg argue that a low-dose screening procedure for lung cancer, which has the highest annual cancer mortality rate, could save thousands of lives around the world if implemented.

This issue also looks at the growing use of tablet computers on wards, ‘hybrid ORs’ and the ten leading imaging innovations.

The number of new technological advances set to impact the medical imaging market continues to increase – with tomosynthesis perhaps one of the best publicised. We talk to Dr Maureen Gillan of the University of Aberdeen about how digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has the potential to significantly improve the accuracy of breast screening.

Dr Matthias Matzko of the Hospital of Dachau also enlightens Medical Imaging Technology on MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS), explaining how it is able to ablate uterine fibroid tumours without breaking the skin.

But with advances in technology comes an increasing reliance on diagnostic imaging, an issue investigated by Rita Redberg and Vivienne Nathanson in our special report. The pair discuss the risks associated with imaging.

Also in this issue, we look at a new type of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and the NHS's recently rolled out PACS programme.

One issue causing particular ire in the medical imaging industry is mammography screening - the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released new guidelines in late 2009 stating that the decision to start regular mammography screening before the age of 50 should be an individual one. Radiology professor Dr Daniel Kopans explains why he disagrees with the recommendation, while USPSTF chair Dr Ned Calonge defends it.

Another growing debate revolves around the sort of skills the modern PACS administrator needs. Dr Paul Nagy, director of the imaging informatics research laboratory at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, gives his advice.

Ultrasound scan safety has also fallen under the spotlight. Dr Deborah Levine, chair of the American College of Radiology's ultrasound commission, explains the issues surrounding "souvenir scans".

Regardless of what product you use, what subsection of the profession you’re working in or even what corner of the world you choose to ply your trade, you’ll probably have been affected by the global isotope shortage that has been a concern for some time. Robert W Atcher, PhD, MBA, and Danny A Basso discuss the current situation and how practitioners can help alleviate the problem.

Elly Earls investigates the use of computer-aided detection in the fight against cancer and asks Robyn L Birdwell, MD, FACR, and Dr Stuart Taylor for their thoughts on this increasingly popular technology.

Whilst technology is a key ingredient for the advancement of diagnostic imaging, so too are the experiences of radiologists. Nic Paton talks to Ronald E Freedman, assistant executive director for education at the American College of Radiology, about the importance of continuing medical education in a profession that thrives on outcomes, good or bad.

In this issue we look at how the role of the radiologist is ever-changing. Who would have thought that just a few decades ago radiologists could go from providing diagnostic imaging to specialising in some of the smallest parts of the body, as Dr Arl Van Moore, president of the American College of Radiology, explains in his Q&A.

Meanwhile, in this edition's cover story, Dr Jonathan Goldin explains that while the benefits of CT are obvious, we must all consider the potentially detrimental effects such procedures have on patients, something that may have been overlooked in the face of technological advances.

Perhaps the saddest lessons to learn come from the death or serious injury of a patient in care. As Patrick Colletti explains in his article about projectiles and MRI machine incidents, more needs to be done to educate people involved in scanning and to prevent such incidents from happening again.

Undoubtedly one of the hottest topics in the world of diagnostic imaging today is the ongoing issue of NSF. It has been the source of much discussion among the radiological community, the cause for huge debate and many a disagreement. In this edition of Medical Imaging Technology we revisit this critical subject and ask for the views of three leading researchers; Professor Sergio Jimenez, Dr Mike Edward and Professor Bob Brasch. All three are conducting research into the condition and all
have a differing opinion on the matter.

Also in this issue, Steven Vastaghlooks at the issue of medical imaging for sufferers of chronic illnesses such as cancer, and the realistic chance of healthcare providers managing to cut costs while still allowing patients to benefit from imaging procedures. Meanwhile, Dr Keith Thulborn discusses the potential of the world's first 9.4T MRI scanner.

As technology has evolved and access to medical imaging procedures has increased, it is hardly surprising that such procedures are now being offered to asymptomatic people for no other reason than that they can afford them. Whole body screening has enjoyed considerable growth in recent years. In this issue we investigate how this trend is not without its risks.

In a similar vein, Dr Noel Brewer examines the physical and physiological trauma, sometimes lasting for many years, that false positive test results can cause patients and the additional healthcare costs that may be incurred.

Nic Paton tackles the increasingly controversial issue of the growing use of computerised tomography, and W Michael Alberts and Laurie Fenton Ambrose offer their opposing views on the use of CT in lung cancer detection.