Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34794595›Full record

GuidelineJournal of the American College of Radiology : JACR2021

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Noncerebral Vasculitis.

Expert Panel on Vascular Imaging, Ayaz Aghayev, Michael L Steigner, Ezana M Azene, Judah Burns, Panithaya Chareonthaitawee, Benoit Desjardins, Riham H El Khouli, Peter C Grayson, Sandeep S Hedgire and 11 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Innovations in Imaging:Current cardiology reports · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 17 institutions in 2 countries.

Expert Panel on Vascular Imaging
Ayaz AghayevPanel Vice-Chair, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: aaghayev@bwh.harvard.edu.
Michael L SteignerPanel Chair; and Vascular CT and MR, and Medical Director 3D Lab, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ezana M AzeneGundersen Health System, La Crosse, Wisconsin.
Judah BurnsProgram Director, Diagnostic Radiology Residency Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Panithaya ChareonthaitaweeMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, Nuclear cardiology expert.
Benoit DesjardinsUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Riham H El KhouliDirector, Theranostic Program and Chair, NM&MI Clinical Protocol and Quality Improvement (CPQI) Committee, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
Peter C GraysonNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, Rheumatologist.
Sandeep S HedgireMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sanjeeva P KalvaChief, Interventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; International Editor, Journal of Clinical Interventional Radiology ISVIR; and Assistant Editor, Radiology - Cardiothoracic, RSNA.
Luke N LedbetterDirector, Head and Neck Imaging, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Yoo Jin LeeUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
David M MauroUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Andres PelaezDirector, Lung Transplant Program, University of Florida Gainesville, Gainesville, Florida; and Primary care physician.
Anil K PillaiSection Chief, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Nimarta SinghMercyhealth, Rockford, Illinois.
Pal S SuranyiMedical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.
Nupur VermaProgram Director, Department of Radiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Eric E WilliamsonMayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography.
Karin E DillSpecialty Chair, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USMayo Clinic · USUniversity of Florida · USEmory University Hospital · USGundersen Health System · USHarvard University · USMedical University of South Carolina · USMercy Health · USMolecular Theranostics (United States) · USMontefiore Medical Center · USNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases · USRadiological Society of North America · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 AR999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Noncerebral vasculitis is a wide-range noninfectious inflammatory disorder affecting the vessels. Vasculitides have been categorized based on the vessel size, such as large-vessel vasculitis, medium-vessel vasculitis, and small-vessel vasculitis. In this document, we cover large-vessel vasculitis and medium-vessel vasculitis. Due to the challenges of vessel biopsy, imaging plays a crucial role in diagnosing this entity. While CTA and MRA can both provide anatomical details of the vessel wall, including wall thickness and enhancement in large-vessel vasculitis, FDG-PET/CT can show functional assessment based on the glycolytic activity of inflammatory cells in the inflamed vessels. Given the size of the vessel in medium-vessel vasculitis, invasive arteriography is still a choice for imaging. However, high-resolution CTA images can depict small-caliber aneurysms, and thus can be utilized in the diagnosis of medium-vessel vasculitis. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyVasculitisDiagnostic ImagingHumansSocieties, MedicalUnited StatesAppropriateness CriteriaAppropriate Use CriteriaAUCGiant cell arteritisKawasaki diseaseLarge-vessel vasculitisMedium-vessel vasculitisPolyarteritis nodosaTakayasu’s arteritis

Identifiers

PMID34794595
PMCPMC12360476
OpenAlexW3213537570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.