Prospective Evaluation of Doppler Sonography to Detect the Twinkling Artifact Versus Unenhanced Computed Tomography for Identifying Urinary Tract Calculi

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135595/1/jum201231101619.pd

Local tumor progression patterns after radiofrequency ablation of colorectal cancer liver metastases

PURPOSE:We aimed to evaluate patterns of local tumor progression (LTP) after radiofrequency ablation (RF ablation) of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) and to highlight the percentage of LTP not attributable to lesion size or RF ablation procedure-related factors (heat sink or insufficient ablation margin).METHODS:CRCLM treated by RF ablation at a single tertiary care center from 2004–2012, with a minimum of six months of postprocedure follow-up, were included in this retrospective study. LTP morphology was classified as focal nodular (270°), or crescentic (90°–270°). Initial metastasis size, minimum ablation margin size, morphology of LTP, presence of a heat sink, and time to progression were recorded independently by two radiologists.RESULTS:Thirty-two of 127 RF ablation treated metastases (25%) with a mean size of 23 mm (standard deviation 12 mm) exhibited LTP. Fifteen of 32 LTPs (47%) were classified as focal nodular, with seven having no procedure-related factor to explain recurrence. Ten of 32 LTPs (31%) were circumferential, with four having no procedure-related factor to explain recurrence. Seven of 32 LTPs (22%) were crescentic, with two having no procedure-related factor to explain recurrence. Of the 13 lesions without any obvious procedure-related reason for LTP, six (46%) were <3 cm in size.CONCLUSION:Although LTP in RF ablation treated CRCLM can often be explained by procedure-related factors or size of the lesion, in this study up to six (5%) of the CRCLM we treated showed LTP without any reasonable cause

Liver imaging reporting and data system: An expert consensus statement

The increasing incidence and high morbidity and mortality of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have inspired the creation of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). LI-RADS aims to reduce variability in exam interpretation, improve communication, facilitate clinical therapeutic decisions, reduce omission of pertinent information, and facilitate the monitoring of outcomes. LI-RADS is a dynamic process, which is updated frequently. In this article, we describe the LI-RADS 2014 version (v2014), which marks the second update since the initial version in 2011

LI-RADS: A Conceptual and Historical Review from Its Beginning to Its Recent Integration into AASLD Clinical Practice Guidance

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS®) is a comprehensive system for standardizing the terminology, technique, interpretation, reporting, and data collection of liver observations in individuals at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LI-RADS is supported and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR). Upon its initial release in 2011, LI-RADS applied only to liver observations identified at CT or MRI. It has since been refined and expanded over multiple updates to now also address ultrasound-based surveillance, contrast-enhanced ultrasound for HCC diagnosis, and CT/MRI for assessing treatment response after locoregional therapy. The LI-RADS 2018 version was integrated into the HCC diagnosis, staging, and management practice guidance of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD). This article reviews the major LI-RADS updates since its 2011 inception and provides an overview of the currently published LI-RADS algorithms

A Comprehensive Analysis of Authorship in Radiology Journals

Objectives The purpose of our study was to investigate authorship trends in radiology journals, and whether International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations have had an impact on these trends. A secondary objective was to explore other variables associated with authorship trends. Methods A retrospective, bibliometric analysis of 49 clinical radiology journals published from 1946–2013 was conducted. The following data was exported from MEDLINE (1946 to May 2014) for each article: authors’ full name, year of publication, primary author institution information, language of publication and publication type. Microsoft Excel Visual Basics for Applications scripts were programmed to categorize extracted data. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the overall mean number of authors per article over time, impact of ICMJE guidelines, authorship frequency per journal, country of origin, article type and language of publication. Results 216,271 articles from 1946–2013 were included. A univariate analysis of the mean authorship frequency per year of all articles yielded a linear relationship between time and authorship frequency. The mean number of authors per article in 1946 (1.42) was found to have increased consistently by 0.07 authors/ article per year (R² = 0.9728, P<0.001) to 5.79 authors/article in 2013. ICMJE guideline dissemination did not have an impact on this rise in authorship frequency. There was considerable variability in mean authors per article and change over time between journals, country of origin, language of publication and article type. Conclusion Overall authorship for 49 radiology journals across 68 years has increased markedly with no demonstrated impact from ICMJE guidelines. A higher number of authors per article was seen in articles from: higher impact journals, European and Asian countries, original research type, and those journals who explicitly endorse the ICMJE guidelines

LI-RADS: a glimpse into the future.

This article provides a glimpse into the future of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS), discussing the immediate and long-term plans for its continuing improvement and expansion. To complement the Core and Essentials components of the latest version of LI-RADS, a comprehensive manual will be released soon, and it will include technical recommendations, management guidance, as well as reporting instructions and templates. In this article, we briefly review the process by which LI-RADS has been developed until now, a process guided by a variable combination of data, expert opinion, and desire for congruency with other diagnostic systems in North America. We then look forward, envisioning that forthcoming updates to LI-RADS will occur regularly every 3 to 5 years, driven by emerging high-quality scientific evidence. We highlight some of the key knowledge and technology gaps that will need to be addressed to enable the needed refinements. We also anticipate future expansions in scope to meet currently unaddressed clinical needs. Finally, we articulate a vision for eventual unification of imaging system for HCC screening and surveillance, diagnosis and staging, and treatment response assessment