International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies Classification of Soft Tissue Vascular Anomalies: Survey-Based Assessment of Musculoskeletal Radiologists' Use in Clinical Practice

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aim: There is controversy regarding the diagnosis and classification of vascular anomalies (VA). As torso and extremities are the second most common body part for presentation of VAs, musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists play a central role in VA classification. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the awareness and clinical use of the International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies (ISSVA) classification by MSK radiologists. Materials and Methods: A Web-based survey was designed and electronically sent to Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) members, with 3 questions on demographics and 7 questions on ISSVA classification use and knowledge. The Z-test for binomial proportions is used to assess for statistical significance between subgroups. Results: The response rate was 12% (130 of 1091), comprised of 64% (83 of 130) academic and 36% (47 of 130) nonacademic MSK radiologists. VAs accounted for only a small (0%-5%) proportion of clinical practice in the majority 92% (119 of 130). Only 17% (22 of 130) of MSK radiologists used the ISSVA classification in practice. Of all respondents, 74% (94 of 127) considered hemangioma a type of vascular malformation (VM). There was no significant difference in the response characteristics between academic and nonacademic radiologists. A greater proportion of MSK radiologists with >5 years' experience provided responses that were discordant with the ISSVA classification compared with less experienced radiologists (0-5 years) in diagnosing hemangiomas in adult patients (P = 0.02), and using the presence of phleboliths to diagnose hemangiomas (P = 0.004). Conclusion: Our survey results indicate a lack of familiarity with the ISSVA classification by the MSK radiology community.

LanguageEnglish (US)
JournalCurrent Problems in Diagnostic Radiology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Blood Vessels
Hemangioma
Torso
Vascular Malformations
Surveys and Questionnaires
Radiologists
Human Body
Radiology
Extremities
Demography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{07e2b45ec19d4fa38d82d9375ac5a397,
title = "International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies Classification of Soft Tissue Vascular Anomalies: Survey-Based Assessment of Musculoskeletal Radiologists' Use in Clinical Practice",
abstract = "Aim: There is controversy regarding the diagnosis and classification of vascular anomalies (VA). As torso and extremities are the second most common body part for presentation of VAs, musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists play a central role in VA classification. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the awareness and clinical use of the International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies (ISSVA) classification by MSK radiologists. Materials and Methods: A Web-based survey was designed and electronically sent to Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) members, with 3 questions on demographics and 7 questions on ISSVA classification use and knowledge. The Z-test for binomial proportions is used to assess for statistical significance between subgroups. Results: The response rate was 12{\%} (130 of 1091), comprised of 64{\%} (83 of 130) academic and 36{\%} (47 of 130) nonacademic MSK radiologists. VAs accounted for only a small (0{\%}-5{\%}) proportion of clinical practice in the majority 92{\%} (119 of 130). Only 17{\%} (22 of 130) of MSK radiologists used the ISSVA classification in practice. Of all respondents, 74{\%} (94 of 127) considered hemangioma a type of vascular malformation (VM). There was no significant difference in the response characteristics between academic and nonacademic radiologists. A greater proportion of MSK radiologists with >5 years' experience provided responses that were discordant with the ISSVA classification compared with less experienced radiologists (0-5 years) in diagnosing hemangiomas in adult patients (P = 0.02), and using the presence of phleboliths to diagnose hemangiomas (P = 0.004). Conclusion: Our survey results indicate a lack of familiarity with the ISSVA classification by the MSK radiology community.",
author = "Shivani Ahlawat and Fayad, {Laura M.} and Durand, {Daniel J.} and Kate Puttgen and Aylin Tekes",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.10.003",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology",
issn = "0363-0188",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies Classification of Soft Tissue Vascular Anomalies

T2 - Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology

AU - Ahlawat,Shivani

AU - Fayad,Laura M.

AU - Durand,Daniel J.

AU - Puttgen,Kate

AU - Tekes,Aylin

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Aim: There is controversy regarding the diagnosis and classification of vascular anomalies (VA). As torso and extremities are the second most common body part for presentation of VAs, musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists play a central role in VA classification. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the awareness and clinical use of the International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies (ISSVA) classification by MSK radiologists. Materials and Methods: A Web-based survey was designed and electronically sent to Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) members, with 3 questions on demographics and 7 questions on ISSVA classification use and knowledge. The Z-test for binomial proportions is used to assess for statistical significance between subgroups. Results: The response rate was 12% (130 of 1091), comprised of 64% (83 of 130) academic and 36% (47 of 130) nonacademic MSK radiologists. VAs accounted for only a small (0%-5%) proportion of clinical practice in the majority 92% (119 of 130). Only 17% (22 of 130) of MSK radiologists used the ISSVA classification in practice. Of all respondents, 74% (94 of 127) considered hemangioma a type of vascular malformation (VM). There was no significant difference in the response characteristics between academic and nonacademic radiologists. A greater proportion of MSK radiologists with >5 years' experience provided responses that were discordant with the ISSVA classification compared with less experienced radiologists (0-5 years) in diagnosing hemangiomas in adult patients (P = 0.02), and using the presence of phleboliths to diagnose hemangiomas (P = 0.004). Conclusion: Our survey results indicate a lack of familiarity with the ISSVA classification by the MSK radiology community.

AB - Aim: There is controversy regarding the diagnosis and classification of vascular anomalies (VA). As torso and extremities are the second most common body part for presentation of VAs, musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists play a central role in VA classification. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the awareness and clinical use of the International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies (ISSVA) classification by MSK radiologists. Materials and Methods: A Web-based survey was designed and electronically sent to Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) members, with 3 questions on demographics and 7 questions on ISSVA classification use and knowledge. The Z-test for binomial proportions is used to assess for statistical significance between subgroups. Results: The response rate was 12% (130 of 1091), comprised of 64% (83 of 130) academic and 36% (47 of 130) nonacademic MSK radiologists. VAs accounted for only a small (0%-5%) proportion of clinical practice in the majority 92% (119 of 130). Only 17% (22 of 130) of MSK radiologists used the ISSVA classification in practice. Of all respondents, 74% (94 of 127) considered hemangioma a type of vascular malformation (VM). There was no significant difference in the response characteristics between academic and nonacademic radiologists. A greater proportion of MSK radiologists with >5 years' experience provided responses that were discordant with the ISSVA classification compared with less experienced radiologists (0-5 years) in diagnosing hemangiomas in adult patients (P = 0.02), and using the presence of phleboliths to diagnose hemangiomas (P = 0.004). Conclusion: Our survey results indicate a lack of familiarity with the ISSVA classification by the MSK radiology community.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033386728&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033386728&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.10.003

DO - 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2017.10.003

M3 - Article

JO - Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology

JF - Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology

SN - 0363-0188

ER -