[en] The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of chest lesions that are missed in interpretations of neck computed tomography (CT) scans. A total of 240 consecutive neck CT scans were retrospectively analyzed to determine whether chest lesions were included or not. All missed chest lesions, which had not been described on neck CT reports, were recorded, and classified according to their clinical significance (insignificant, indeterminate, or significant) and awareness (known or unknown) at the time of CT interpretation, and their radiologic patterns were analyzed. Eighty seven (36.3%) of 240 neck CT scans had 105 chest lesions, and 88 of these were not described on the neck CT reports. Thirty seven clinically known or insignificant lesions were excluded, resulting in a miss rate for chest lesions of 35.2% (37/105), with six of these (5.7%) being potentially significant. The most common location of missed chest lesions was the lung (56/88, 63.6%), and 45 (80.4%) of these missed lung lesions were visualized only with lung window settings. Chest lesions were common and frequently missed on neck CT interpretations. When reviewing neck CT scans, a special attention should be given to lung lesions by using lung window settings

[en] In 2010, the Asian Society of Cardiovascular Imaging (ASCI) provided recommendations for cardiac CT and MRI, and this document reflects an update of the 2010 ASCI appropriate use criteria (AUC). In 2016, the ASCI formed a new working group for revision of AUC for noninvasive cardiac imaging. A major change that we made in this document is the rating of various noninvasive tests (exercise electrocardiogram, echocardiography, positron emission tomography, single-photon emission computed tomography, radionuclide imaging, cardiac magnetic resonance, and cardiac computed tomography/angiography), compared side by side for their applications in various clinical scenarios. Ninety-five clinical scenarios were developed from eight selected pre-existing guidelines and classified into four sections as follows: 1) detection of coronary artery disease, symptomatic or asymptomatic; 2) cardiac evaluation in various clinical scenarios; 3) use of imaging modality according to prior testing; and 4) evaluation of cardiac structure and function. The clinical scenarios were scored by a separate rating committee on a scale of 1–9 to designate appropriate use, uncertain use, or inappropriate use according to a modified Delphi method. Overall, the AUC ratings for CT were higher than those of previous guidelines. These new AUC provide guidance for clinicians choosing among available testing modalities for various cardiac diseases and are also unique, given that most previous AUC for noninvasive imaging include only one imaging technique. As cardiac imaging is multimodal in nature, we believe that these AUC will be more useful for clinical decision making