Purpose: To identify effective factors predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: This retrospective cohort study recruited 898 consecutive patients with PCa treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The patients were divided into EPE and non-EPE groups based on the analysis of whole-mount histopathologic sections. Histopathological analysis (ISUP biopsy grade group) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (PI-RADS v2.1 scores [1–5] and the Mehralivand EPE grade [0–3]) were used to assess the prediction of EPE. We also assessed the clinical usefulness of the prediction model based on decision-curve analysis. Results: Of 800 included patients, 235 (29.3%) had EPE, and 565 patients (70.7%) did not (non-EPE). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the biopsy ISUP grade, PI-RADS v2.1 score, and Mehralivand EPE grade were independent risk factors for EPE. In the regression assessment of the models, the best discrimination (area under the curve of 0.879) was obtained using the basic model (age, serum PSA, prostate volume at MRI, positive biopsy core, clinical T stage, and D’Amico risk group) and Mehralivand EPE grade 3. Decision-curve analysis showed that combining Mehralivand EPE grade 3 with the basic model resulted in superior net benefits for predicting EPE. Conclusion: Mehralivand EPE grades and PI-RADS v2.1 scores, in addition to basic clinical and demographic information, are potentially useful for predicting EPE in patients with PCa.

Objective: Primary frozen shoulder causes significant pain and progressively restricts shoulder movements. Diagnosis is primarily clinically based on patient history and physical examination. Management is mainly non-invasive owing to its self-limiting clinical course. However, clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder have not yet been developed in Korea. The developed guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of frozen shoulder.Methods: A guideline development committee reviewed the literature from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KMbase). Using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome) framework, the committee formulated two backgrounds and 16 key questions to address common clinical concerns. Recommendations were made using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.Results: Diabetes, thyroid disease, and dyslipidemia significantly increase the risk of developing a frozen shoulder. Although frozen shoulder is often self-limiting, some patients may experience long-term disabilities. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging should be used as adjunctive tools alongside clinical diagnosis, and not as independent diagnostic methods. Noninvasive approaches, such as medications, physical modalities, exercises, electrical stimulation, and manual therapy, may reduce pain and improve shoulder function. Other noninvasive interventions have limited evidence, and their application should be based on clinical judgment. Intra-articular steroid injections are recommended for treatment, and physiotherapy or hydrodilatation with steroid injections can also be beneficial.Conclusion: These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating primary frozen shoulder.

Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a deep learning (DL) algorithm for the quantitative measurement of thoracolumbar (TL) fracture features, and to evaluate its efficacy across varying levels of clinical expertise.Methods: Using the pretrained Mask Region-Based Convolutional Neural Networks model, originally developed for vertebral body segmentation and fracture detection, we fine-tuned the model and added a new module for measuring fracture metrics—compression rate (CR), Cobb angle (CA), Gardner angle (GA), and sagittal index (SI)—from lumbar spine lateral radiographs. These metrics were derived from six-point labeling by 3 radiologists, forming the ground truth (GT). Training utilized 1,000 nonfractured and 318 fractured radiographs, while validations employed 213 internal and 200 external fractured radiographs. The accuracy of the DL algorithm in quantifying fracture features was evaluated against GT using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Additionally, 4 readers with varying expertise levels, including trainees and an attending spine surgeon, performed measurements with and without DL assistance, and their results were compared to GT and the DL model.Results: The DL algorithm demonstrated good to excellent agreement with GT for CR, CA, GA, and SI in both internal (0.860, 0.944, 0.932, and 0.779, respectively) and external (0.836, 0.940, 0.916, and 0.815, respectively) validations. DL-assisted measurements significantly improved most measurement values, particularly for trainees.Conclusion: The DL algorithm was validated as an accurate tool for quantifying TL fracture features using radiographs. DL-assisted measurement is expected to expedite the diagnostic process and enhance reliability, particularly benefiting less experienced clinicians.

Objectives: To develop an opportunistic screening model based on a deep learning algorithm to detect recent vertebral fractures in abdominal or chest CTs. Materials and Methods: A total of 1309 coronal reformatted images (504 with a recent fracture from 119 patients, and 805 without fracture from 115 patients), from torso CTs, performed from September 2018 to April 2022, on patients who also had a spine MRI within two months, were included. Two readers participated in image selection and manually labeled the fractured segment on each selected image with Neuro-T (version 2.3.3; Neurocle Inc.) software. We split the images randomly into the training and internal test set (labeled: unlabeled = 480:700) and the secondary interval validation set (24:105). For the observer study, three radiologists reviewed the CT images in the external test set with and without deep learning assistance and scored the likelihood of an acute fracture in each image independently. Results: For the training and internal test sets, the AI achieved a 99.86% test accuracy, 91.22% precision, and 89.18% F1 score for detection of recent fracture. Then, in the secondary internal validation set, it achieved 99.90%, 74.93%, and 78.30%, respectively. In the observer study, with the assistance of the deep learning algorithm, a significant improvement was observed in the radiology resident’s accuracy, from 92.79% to 98.2% (p = 0.04). Conclusion: The model showed a high level of accuracy in the test set and also the internal validation set. If this algorithm is applied opportunistically to daily torso CT evaluation, it will be helpful for the early detection of fractures that require treatment.

서은혜, et al. J Korean Soc Radiol. 2022 Jul;83(4):924-930. https://doi.org/10.3348/jksr.2021.0063