Publications (3)4.18 Total impact
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Workflow efficiency and workload of radiological technologists (RTs) were compared in head examinations performed with two 1.5 T magnetic resonance (MR) scanners equipped with or without an automated user interface called "day optimizing throughput" (Dot) workflow engine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-four patients with known intracranial pathology were examined with a 1.5 T MR scanner with Dot workflow engine (Siemens MAGNETOM Aera) and with a 1.5 T MR scanner with conventional user interface (Siemens MAGNETOM Avanto) using four standardized examination protocols. The elapsed time for all necessary work steps, which were performed by 11 RTs within the total examination time, was compared for each examination at both MR scanners. The RTs evaluated the user-friendliness of both scanners by a questionnaire. Normality of distribution was checked for all continuous variables by use of the Shapiro-Wilk test. Normally distributed variables were analyzed by Student's paired t-test, otherwise Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare means. RESULTS: Total examination time of MR examinations performed with Dot engine was reduced from 24:53 to 20:01 minutes (P < .001) and the necessary RT intervention decreased by 61% (P < .001). The Dot engine's automated choice of MR protocols was significantly better assessed by the RTs than the conventional user interface (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: According to this preliminary study, the Dot workflow engine is a time-saving user assistance software, which decreases the RTs' effort significantly and may help to automate neuroradiological examinations for a higher workflow efficiency.Academic radiology 03/2013; · 2.09 Impact Factor
Article: Small bowel imaging with MRI.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has evolved as a powerful tool for the assessment of the small bowel. Strengths of MRI include the superb soft-tissue contrast, lack of radiation exposure, and the implementation of fast scanning techniques. Clinically relevant findings such as inflammation and tumor disease can be well-depicted. We describe in this article current techniques of small bowel MRI including its implementation and clinical outcome in comparison to other radiological and endoscopic procedures.Academic radiology 07/2012; 19(11):1424-33. · 2.09 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A 68-year-old male patient was referred to our institution in May 2011 for a suspected tumor in the pancreatic head with consecutive jaundice. Using magnetic resonance imaging, further differentiation between chronic inflammation and a malignant process was not possible with certainty. Apart from cholestasis, laboratory studies showed increased values for CA 19-9 to 532 U/ml (normal <37 U/ml) and hypergammaglobulinemia (immunoglobulin G, IgG) of 19.3% (normal 8.0-15.8%) with an elevation of the IgG4 subtype to 2,350 mg/l (normal 52-1,250 mg/l). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography revealed a prominent stenosis of the distal ductus hepaticus communis caused by pancreatic head swelling and also a bihilar stenosis of the main hepatic bile ducts. Cytology demonstrated inflammatory cells without evidence of malignancy. Under suspicion of autoimmune pancreatitis with IgG4-associated cholangitis, immunosuppressive therapy with steroids and azathioprine was started. Follow-up endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after 3 months displayed regressive development of the diverse stenoses. Jaundice had disappeared and blood values had returned to normal ranges. Moreover, no tumor of the pancreatic head was present in the magnetic resonance control images. Due to clinical and radiological similarities but a consecutive completely different prognosis and therapy, it is of fundamental importance to differentiate between pancreatic cancer and autoimmune pancreatitis. Especially, determination of serum IgG4 levels and associated bile duct lesions induced by inflammation should clarify the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis and legitimate immunosuppressive therapy.Case Reports in Gastroenterology 01/2012; 6(1):211-6.