Browsing by Author "Grajo, Joseph R."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ABR Core Examination Preparation: Results of a Survey of Fourth-Year Radiology Residents Who Took the 2013 Examination
    (Elsevier, 2015-01) Shetty, Anup S.; Grajo, Joseph R.; Decker, Summer; Heitkamp, Darel E.; DeStigter, Kristen K.; Mezwa, Duane G.; Deitte, Lori; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, IU School of Medicine
    Rationale and Objectives A survey was administered to fourth-year radiology residents after receiving their results from the first American Board of Radiology (ABR) Core examination in 2013. The purpose was to gather information regarding resources and study strategies to share with program directors and future resident classes. Materials and Methods An online survey was distributed to examinees nationwide. The survey included free-response and multiple choice questions that covered examination results, perceived value of enumerated study resources, case-based and didactic teaching conferences, board reviews, study materials for noninterpretive skills, multidisciplinary conference attendance, and free-form comments. Results Two hundred sixty-six of 1186 residents who took the Core examination responded to the survey. Some resources demonstrated a significant difference in perceived value between residents who passed the examination and residents who failed, including internal board reviews (1.10, P < .01), daily didactic conferences (1.51, P < .01), and daily case conferences (1.43, P < .01). Residents who passed reported that conferences and review sessions at their institutions were modified with multiple choice questions, audience response, and integration of clinical physics and patient safety topics compared to residents who failed. Conclusions Radiology residents and residency programs have adapted their preparations for the ABR Core examination in a variety of ways. Certain practices and study tools, including daily conferences and internal board reviews, had greater perceived value by residents who passed the examination than by residents who failed. This survey provides insights that can be used to assess and modify current preparation strategies for the ABR Core examination.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Design and Rationale for the Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Biomarkers to Predict Diabetes After Acute Pancreatitis in the Diabetes RElated to Acute Pancreatitis and Its Mechanisms Study: From the Type 1 Diabetes in Acute Pancreatitis Consortium
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2022) Tirkes, Temel; Chinchilli, Vernon M.; Bagci, Ulas; Parker, Jason G.; Zhao, Xuandong; Dasyam, Anil K.; Feranec, Nicholas; Grajo, Joseph R.; Shah, Zarine K.; Poullos, Peter D.; Spilseth, Benjamin; Zaheer, Atif; Xie, Karen L.; Wachsman, Ashley M.; Campbell-Thompson, Martha; Conwell, Darwin L.; Fogel, Evan L.; Forsmark, Christopher E.; Hart, Phil A.; Pandol, Stephen J.; Park, Walter G.; Pratley, Richard E.; Yazici, Cemal; Laughlin, Maren R.; Andersen, Dana K.; Serrano, Jose; Bellin, Melena D.; Yadav, Dhiraj; Type 1 Diabetes in Acute Pancreatitis Consortium (T1DAPC); Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    This core component of the Diabetes RElated to Acute pancreatitis and its Mechanisms (DREAM) study will examine the hypothesis that advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques can reflect underlying pathophysiologic changes and provide imaging biomarkers that predict diabetes mellitus (DM) following acute pancreatitis (AP). A subset of participants in the DREAM study will enroll and undergo serial MRI examinations using a specific research protocol. We aim to differentiate at-risk individuals from those who remain euglycemic by identifying parenchymal features following AP. Performing longitudinal MRI will enable us to observe and understand the natural history of post-AP DM. We will compare MRI parameters obtained by interrogating tissue properties in euglycemic, prediabetic and incident diabetes subjects and correlate them with metabolic, genetic, and immunological phenotypes. Differentiating imaging parameters will be combined to develop a quantitative composite risk score. This composite risk score will potentially have the ability to monitor the risk of DM in clinical practice or trials. We will use artificial intelligence, specifically deep learning, algorithms to optimize the predictive ability of MRI. In addition to the research MRI, the DREAM study will also correlate clinical computerized tomography and MRI scans with DM development.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Inter-observer variability of radiologists for Cambridge classification of chronic pancreatitis using CT and MRCP: results from a large multi-center study
    (SpringerLink, 2020-05) Tirkes, Temel; Shah, Zarine K.; Takahashi, Naoki; Grajo, Joseph R.; Chang, Stephanie T.; Wachsman, Ashley M.; Mawad, Kareem; Farinas, Carlos A.; Li, Liang; Appana, Savitri N.; Conwell, Darwin L.; Yadav, Dhiraj; Dasyam, Anil K.; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Purpose: Determine inter-observer variability among radiologists in assigning Cambridge Classification (CC) of chronic pancreatitis (CP) based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). Methods: Among 422 eligible subjects enrolled into the PROCEED study between 6/2017 and 8/2018, 39 were selected randomly for this study (chronic abdominal pain (n = 8; CC of 0), suspected CP (n = 22; CC of 0, 1 or 2) or definite CP (n = 9; CC of 3 or 4). Each imaging was scored by the local radiologist (LRs) and three of five central radiologists (CRs) at other consortium sites. The CRs were blinded to clinical data and site information of the participants. We compared the CC score assigned by the LR with the consensus CC score assigned by the CRs. The weighted kappa statistic (K) was used to estimate the inter-observer agreement. Results: For the majority of subjects (34/39), the group assignment by LR agreed with the consensus composite CT/MRCP score by the CRs (concordance ranging from 75 to 89% depending on cohort group). There was moderate agreement (63% and 67% agreed, respectively) between CRs and LRs in both the CT score (weighted Kappa [95% CI] = 0.56 [0.34, 0.78]; p-value = 0.57) and the MR score (weighted Kappa [95% CI] = 0.68 [0.49, 0.86]; p-value = 0.72). The composite CT/MR score showed moderate agreement (weighted Kappa [95% CI] = 0.62 [0.43, 0.81]; p-value = 0.80). Conclusion: There is a high degree of concordance among radiologists for assignment of CC using MRI and CT.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reporting Standards for Chronic Pancreatitis by Using CT, MRI, and MR Cholangiopancreatography: The Consortium for the Study of Chronic Pancreatitis, Diabetes, and Pancreatic Cancer
    (RSNA, 2019-01) Tirkes, Temel; Shah, Zarine K.; Takahashi, Naoki; Grajo, Joseph R.; Chang, Stephanie T.; Venkatesh, Sudhakar K.; Conwell, Darwin L.; Fogel, Evan L.; Park, Walter; Topazian, Mark; Yadav, Dhiraj; Dasyam, Anil K.; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Chronic pancreatitis is an inflammatory condition of the pancreas with clinical manifestations ranging from abdominal pain, acute pancreatitis, exocrine and/or endocrine dysfunction, and pancreatic cancer. There is a need for longitudinal studies in well-phenotyped patients to ascertain the utility of cross-sectional imaging findings of chronic pancreatitis for diagnosis and assessment of disease severity. CT and MR cholangiopancreatography are the most common cross-sectional imaging studies performed for the evaluation of chronic pancreatitis. Currently, there are no universal reporting standards for chronic pancreatitis. Several features of chronic pancreatitis are applied clinically, such as calcifications, parenchymal T1 signal changes, focal or diffuse gland atrophy, or irregular contour of the gland. Such findings have not been incorporated into standardized diagnostic criteria. There is also lack of consensus on quantification of disease severity in chronic pancreatitis, other than by using ductal features alone as described in the Cambridge classification. The Consortium for the Study of Chronic Pancreatitis, Diabetes, and Pancreatic Cancer (CPDPC) was established by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the National Cancer Institute in 2015 to undertake collaborative studies on chronic pancreatitis, diabetes mellitus, and pancreatic adenocarcinoma. CPDPC investigators from the Adult Chronic Pancreatitis Working Group were tasked with development of a new consensus approach to reporting features of chronic pancreatitis aimed to standardize diagnosis and assessment of disease severity for clinical trials. This consensus statement presents and defines features of chronic pancreatitis along with recommended reporting metrics.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    T1 signal intensity ratio of the pancreas as an imaging biomarker for the staging of chronic pancreatitis
    (Springer, 2022-07-20) Tirkes, Temel; Dasyam, Anil K.; Sham, Zarine K.; Fogel, Evan L.; Vege, Santhi Swaroop; Li, Liang; Li, Shuang; Chang, Stephanie T.; Farinas, Carlos A.; Grajo, Joseph R.; Mawad, Kareem; Takahashi, Naoki; Venkatesh, Sudhakar K.; Wachsman, Ashley; Fisher, William E.; Forsmark , Christopher E.; Hart, Phil A.; Pandol, Stephen J.; Park, Walter G.; Van Den Eeden, Stephen K.; Yang , Yunlong; Topazian, Mark; Andersen, Dana K.; Serrano, Jose; Conwell, Darwin L.; Yadav, Dhiraj; The Consortium for the Study of Chronic Pancreatitis, Diabetes, Pancreatic Cancer (CPDPC); Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Purpose Our purpose was to validate the T1 SIR (T1 score) as an imaging biomarker for the staging of CP in a large, multi-institutional, prospective study. Methods The prospective study population included 820 participants enrolled in the PROCEED study from nine clinical centers between June 2017 and December 2021. A radiologist at each institution used a standardized method to measure the T1 signal intensity of the pancreas and the reference organs (spleen, paraspinal muscle, liver), which was used to derive respective T1 scores. Participants were stratified according to the seven mechanistic stages of chronic pancreatitis (MSCP 0–6) based on their clinical history, MRCP, and CT findings. Results The mean pancreas-to-spleen T1 score was 1.30 in participants with chronic abdominal pain, 1.22 in those with acute or recurrent acute pancreatitis, and 1.03 in definite CP. After adjusting for covariates, we observed a linear, progressive decline in the pancreas-to-spleen T1 score with increasing MSCP from 0 to 6. The mean pancreas-to-spleen T1 scores were 1.34 (MSCP 0), 1.27 (MSCP 1), 1.21 (MSCP 2), 1.16 (MSCP 3), 1.18 (MSCP 4), 1.12 (MSCP 5), and 1.05 (MSCP 6) (p < 0.0001). The pancreas-to-liver and pancreas-to-muscle T1 scores showed less linear trends and wider confidence intervals. Conclusion The T1 score calculated by SIR of the pancreas-to-spleen shows a negative linear correlation with the progression of chronic pancreatitis. It holds promise as a practical imaging biomarker in evaluating disease severity in clinical research and practice.