Search

MRI plays an important role as a secondary test or problem-solving modality in the evaluation of adnexal lesions depicted at US. MRI has increased specificity compared with US, decreasing the number of false-positive diagnoses for malignancy and thereby avoiding unnecessary or over-extensive surgery in patients with benign lesions or borderline tumors, while women with possible malignancies can be expeditiously referred for oncologic surgical evaluation. The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) MRI Committee is an international collaborative effort formed under the direction of the American College of Radiology and includes a diverse group of experts on adnexal imaging and management who developed the O-RADS MRI risk stratification system. This scoring system assigns a probability of malignancy based on the MRI features of an adnexal lesion and provides information to facilitate optimal patient management. The widespread implementation of a codified reporting system will lead to improved interpretation agreement and standardized communication between radiologists and referring physicians. In addition, it will allow for high-quality multi-institutional collaborations-an important unmet need that has hampered the performance of high-quality research in this area in the past. This article provides guidelines on using the O-RADS MRI risk stratification system in clinical practice, as well as in the educational and research settings.

Our purpose was to evaluate the accuracy of LI-RADS Treatment Response Algorithm (LR-TRA) for assessing the viability of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), using explant pathology as the gold standard.This retrospective study included patients who underwent SBRT for locoregional treatment of HCC between 2008 and 2019 with subsequent liver transplantation. Five radiologists independently assessed all treated lesions by using the LR-TRA. Imaging and posttransplant histopathology were compared. Lesions were categorized as either completely (100%) or incompletely (100%) necrotic, and performance characteristics and predictive values for the LR-TR viable and nonviable categories were calculated for each reader. Interreader reliability was calculated using the Fleiss kappa test.A total of 40 treated lesions in 26 patients (median age, 63 years [interquartile range, 59.4-65.5]; 23 men) were included. For lesions treated with SBRT, sensitivity for incomplete tumor necrosis across readers ranged between 71% and 86%, specificity between 85% and 96%, and positive predictive value between 86% and 92%, when the LR-TR equivocal category was treated as nonviable, accounting for subject clustering. When the LR-TR equivocal category was treated as viable, sensitivity of complete tumor necrosis for lesions treated with SBRT ranged from 88% to 96%, specificity from 71% to 93%, and negative predictive value from 85% to 96%. Interreader reliability was fair (k = 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.33). Although a loss of arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) was highly correlated with pathologically nonviable tumor on explant, almost half of the patients with APHE had pathologically nonviable tumor on explant.LR-TRA v2018 performs well for predicting complete and incomplete necrosis in HCC treated with SBRT. In contrast to other locoregional therapies, the presence of APHE after SBRT does not always indicate viable tumor and suggests that observation may be an appropriate strategy for these patients.

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people experience health disparities, and many avoid necessary medical care because of fears of discrimination or mistreatment. Disparate care is further compounded by limited understanding of gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) and gender-affirming surgery among the medical community. Specific to radiology, TGD patients report more negative imaging experiences than negative general health encounters, highlighting the need for guidance and best practices for inclusive imaging care. A patient's imaging journey provides numerous opportunities for improvement. Inclusive practice in a radiology department starts with ordering and scheduling the examination, facilitated by staff education on appropriate use of a patient's chosen name, gender identity, and pronouns. Contemporary electronic health record systems have the capacity for recording detailed sexual orientation and gender identity data, but staff must be trained to solicit and use this information. A welcoming environment can help TGD patients to feel safe during the imaging experience and may include institutional nondiscrimination policies, gender-neutral signage, and all-gender single-user dressing rooms and bathrooms. Image acquisition should be performed using trauma-informed and patient-centered care. Finally, radiologists should be aware of reporting considerations for TGD patients, such as avoiding the use of gender in reports when it is not medically relevant and using precise, respectful language for findings related to GAHT and gender-affirming surgical procedures. As a field, radiology has a range of opportunities for improving care delivery for TGD patients, and the authors summarize recommended best practices. See the invited commentary by Stowell in this issue.

Objectives Imaging evaluation is an essential part of treatment planning for patients with ovarian cancer. Variation in the terminology used for describing ovarian cancer on computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can lead to ambiguity and inconsistency in clinical radiology reports. The aim of this collaborative project between Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Uterine and Ovarian Cancer (UOC) Disease-focused Panel (DFP) and the European Society of Uroradiology (ESUR) Female Pelvic Imaging (FPI) Working Group was to develop an ovarian cancer reporting lexicon for CT and MR imaging. Methods Twenty-one members of the SAR UOC DFP and ESUR FPI working group, one radiology clinical fellow, and two gynecologic oncology surgeons formed the Ovarian Cancer Reporting Lexicon Committee. Two attending radiologist members of the committee prepared a preliminary list of imaging terms that was sent as an online survey to 173 radiologists and gynecologic oncologic physicians, of whom 67 responded to the survey. The committee reviewed these responses to create a final consensus list of lexicon terms. Results An ovarian cancer reporting lexicon was created for CT and MR Imaging. This consensus-based lexicon has 6 major categories of terms: general, adnexal lesion-specific, peritoneal carcinomatosis-specific, lymph node-specific, metastatic disease -specific, and fluid-specific. Conclusions This lexicon for CT and MR imaging evaluation of ovarian cancer patients has the capacity to improve the clarity and consistency of reporting disease sites seen on imaging. Key points • This reporting lexicon for CT and MR imaging provides a list of consensus-based, standardized terms and definitions for reporting sites of ovarian cancer on imaging at initial diagnosis or follow-up. • Use of standardized terms and morphologic imaging descriptors can help improve interdisciplinary communication of disease extent and facilitate optimal patient management. • The radiologists should identify and communicate areas of disease, including difficult to resect or potentially unresectable disease that may limit the ability to achieve optimal resection.

Primary vaginal cancer is rare, comprising 1% to 2% of gynecologic malignancies and 20% of all malignancies involving the vagina. More frequently, the vagina is involved secondarily by direct invasion from malignancies originating in adjacent organs or by metastases from other pelvic or extrapelvic primary malignancies. Data on the use of imaging in vaginal cancer are sparse. Insights are derived from the study of imaging in cervical cancer and have reasonable generalizability to vaginal cancer due to similar tumor biology. Given the trend toward definitive chemoradiation for both cancers in all but early stage lesions, principles of postchemoradiation tumor response evaluation are largely analogous. Accordingly, many of the recommendations outlined here are informed by principles translated from the literature on cervical cancer. For pretreatment assessment of local tumor burden and in the case of recurrent vaginal cancer, MRI is the preferred imaging modality. PET/CT has demonstrated utility for the detection of nodal metastatic and unexpected distant metastatic disease. 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.

In 2012, the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) was formed by the merger of the Society of Gastrointestinal Radiologists (SGR) and the Society of Uroradiology (SUR). On the occasion of SAR's ten year anniversary, this commentary describes important changes in society structure, the growth and diversity of society membership, new educational and research initiatives, intersociety and international outreach, and plans for the future.

The authors provide a commentary on the current status of the Abdominal Radiology Fellowship recruitment process, which is not presently governed by a formal Match. Abdominal Radiology is the largest radiology subspecialty fellowship that remains outside of the Match. The Society of Abdominal Radiology convened a task force in 2019 to assess stakeholder viewpoints on a Match and found that the community was divided. Radiology departments and Abdominal Radiology fellowship program directors have voluntarily complied with a series of guidelines laid out by the Society of Chairs in Academic Radiology Departments during the two most recent recruiting cycles, but challenges in the process persist. Stakeholders report improved organization and fairness as a result of these procedural changes, and the authors suggest that Abdominal Radiology may continue to consider a formal fellowship Match in coming years.

Endometrial cancer is the second most common gynecologic cancer worldwide and the most common gynecologic cancer in the United States, with an increasing incidence in high-income countries. Although the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for endometrial cancer is a surgical staging system, contemporary published evidence-based data and expert opinions recommend MRI for treatment planning as it provides critical diagnostic information on tumor size and depth, extent of myometrial and cervical invasion, extrauterine extent, and lymph node status, all of which are essential in choosing the most appropriate therapy. Multiparametric MRI using a combination of T2-weighted sequences, diffusion-weighted imaging, and multiphase contrast-enhanced imaging is the mainstay for imaging assessment of endometrial cancer. Identification of important prognostic factors at MRI improves both treatment selection and posttreatment follow-up. MRI also plays a crucial role for fertility-preserving strategies and in patients who are not surgical candidates by helping guide therapy and identify procedural complications. This review is a product of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Uterine and Ovarian Cancer Disease-Focused Panel and reflects a multidisciplinary international collaborative effort to summarize updated information highlighting the role of MRI for endometrial cancer depiction and delineation, treatment planning, and follow-up. The article includes information regarding dedicated MRI protocols, tips for MRI reporting, imaging pitfalls, and strategies for image quality optimization. The roles of MRI-guided radiation therapy, hybrid PET/MRI, and advanced MRI techniques that are applicable to endometrial cancer imaging are also discussed.

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) and MRI risk stratification systems were developed by an international group of experts in adnexal imaging to aid radiologists in assessing adnexal lesions. The goal of imaging is to appropriately triage patients with adnexal lesions. US is the first-line imaging modality for assessment, whereas MRI can be used as a problem-solving tool. Both US and MRI can accurately characterize benign lesions such as simple cysts, endometriomas, hemorrhagic cysts, and dermoid cysts, avoiding unnecessary or inappropriate surgery. In patients with a lesion that does not meet criteria for one of these benign diagnoses, MRI can further characterize the lesion with an improved specificity for cancer and the ability to provide a probable histologic subtype in the presence of certain MRI features. This allows personalized treatment, including avoiding overly extensive surgery or allowing fertility-sparing procedures for suspected benign, borderline, or low-grade tumors. When MRI findings indicate a risk of an invasive cancer, patients can be expeditiously referred to a gynecologic oncologic surgeon. This narrative review provides expert opinion on the utility of multiparametric MRI when using the O-RADS US and MRI management systems.

This study evaluated the technical feasibility of 2-dimensional transvaginal shear wave elastography to quantify cervical stiffness in nonpregnant and pregnant women and established normal values in each group. With institutional review board approval, we performed a prospective study with an age-matched historical control design. Sixteen premenopausal nonpregnant women without cervical pathology and 17 low-risk pregnant women (gestational age 17-33 weeks) were enrolled. Cervical shear wave speeds were measured on a SuperSonic Aixplorer machine. The mean shear wave speeds of anterior cervix were 4.96 ± 1.96 m/s in nonpregnant women and 1.92 ± 0.31 m/s in pregnant women. No significant stiffness difference was found between the anterior and posterior cervix (P = 0.15). The upper cervix was stiffer than the lower cervix in the pregnant women (P = 0.00012). Transvaginal shear wave elastography reveals that cervix at a midterm gestation is significantly softer than nonpregnant cervix (P < 0.0001) and suggests a spatial stiffness gradient along the length of the cervix, consistent with histopathology and limited elastography literature. Our results indicate the potential of transvaginal shear wave elastography to provide objective and quantitative estimates of cervical stiffness, especially during pregnancy.

Objective Distress among cancer patients has been broadly accepted as an important indicator of well‐being but has not been well studied. We investigated patient characteristics associated with high distress levels as well as correlations among measures of patient‐reported distress and “objective” stress‐related biomarkers among colorectal cancer patients. Methods In total, 238 patients with colon or rectal cancer completed surveys including the Distress Thermometer, Problem List, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. We abstracted demographic and clinical information from patient charts and determined salivary cortisol level and imaging‐based sarcopenia. We evaluated associations between patient characteristics (demographics, clinical factors, and psychosocial and physical measures) and three outcomes (patient‐reported distress, cortisol, and sarcopenia) with Spearman's rank correlations and multivariable linear regression. The potential moderating effect of age was separately investigated by including an interaction term in the regression models. Results Patient‐reported distress was associated with gender (median: women 5.0, men 3.0, p, Patient‐reported distress is closely associated with psychosocial and physical needs experienced by colorectal cancer patients, while cortisol is limited in its association to certain needs and younger patients. Stress biomarkers may not be as reliable as patient‐reported distress in understanding the colorectal patient experience.

Acute pelvic pain is a common presenting complaint in both the emergency room and outpatient settings. Pelvic pain of gynecologic origin in postmenopausal women occurs less frequently than in premenopausal women; however, it has important differences in etiology. The most common causes of postmenopausal pelvic pain from gynecologic origin are ovarian cysts, uterine fibroids, pelvic inflammatory disease, and ovarian neoplasm. Other etiologies of pelvic pain are attributable to urinary, gastrointestinal, and vascular systems. As the optimal imaging modality varies for these etiologies, it is important to narrow the differential diagnosis before choosing the initial diagnostic imaging examination. Transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound are the best initial imaging techniques when the differential is primarily of gynecologic origin. CT with intravenous (IV) contrast is more useful if the differential diagnosis remains broad. MRI without IV contrast or MRI without and with IV contrast, as well as CT without IV contrast may also be used for certain differential considerations. 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.

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) helps reduce recall rates and improve cancer detection compared with two-dimensional (2D) mammography but has a longer interpretation time. Purpose To evaluate the effect of DBT slab thickness and overlap on reader performance and interpretation time in the absence of 1-mm slices. Materials and Methods In this retrospective HIPAA-compliant multireader study of DBT examinations performed between August 2013 and July 2017, four fellowship-trained breast imaging radiologists blinded to final histologic findings interpreted DBT examinations by using a standard protocol (10-mm slabs with 5-mm overlap, 1-mm slices, synthetic 2D mammogram) and an experimental protocol (6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, synthetic 2D mammogram) with a crossover design. Among the 122 DBT examinations, 74 mammographic findings had final histologic findings, including 31 masses (26 malignant), 20 groups of calcifications (12 malignant), 18 architectural distortions (15 malignant), and five asymmetries (two malignant). Durations of reader interpretations were recorded. Comparisons were made by using receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnostic performance and paired t tests for continuous variables. Results Among 122 women, mean age was 58.6 years ± 10.1 (standard deviation). For detection of malignancy, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were similar between protocols (range, 0.83-0.94 vs 0.84-0.92; P ≥ .63). Mean DBT interpretation time was shorter with the experimental protocol for three of four readers (reader 1, 5.6 minutes ± 1.7 vs 4.7 minutes ± 1.4 [P < .001]; reader 2, 2.8 minutes ± 1.1 vs 2.3 minutes ± 1.0 [P = .001]; reader 3, 3.6 minutes ± 1.4 vs 3.3 minutes ± 1.3 [P = .17]; reader 4, 4.3 minutes ± 1.0 vs 3.8 minutes ± 1.1 [P ≤ .001]), with 72% reduction in both mean number of images and mean file size (P < .001 for both). Conclusion A digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction protocol that uses 6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, without 1-mm slices, had similar diagnostic performance compared with the standard protocol and led to a reduced interpretation time for three of four readers. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

A fetus with an increased nuchal translucency at 11 to 14 weeks gestation is at risk for aneuploidy, genetic syndromes, structural anomalies, and intrauterine fetal demise in both single and twin gestations. In addition to referral to genetics for counseling and consideration of diagnostic genetic testing, a detailed anatomic survey and fetal echocardiogram are indicated in the second trimester to screen for congenital malformations and major heart defects. 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.

Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) can be categorized as primary or early if occurring in the first 24 hours after delivery, whereas late or delayed PPH occurs between 24 hours and 6 weeks. Most of the causes of PPH can be diagnosed clinically, but imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis of many causes of PPH. Pelvic ultrasound (transabdominal and transvaginal with Doppler) is the imaging modality of choice for the initial evaluation of PPH. Contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis and CT angiogram of the abdomen and pelvis may be appropriate to determine if active ongoing hemorrhage is present, to localize the bleeding, and to identify the source of bleeding. 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.

This publication summarizes the relevant literature for the imaging of patients with symptoms of abnormal uterine bleeding, including initial imaging, follow-up imaging when the original ultrasound is inconclusive, and follow-up imaging when surveillance is appropriate. For patients with abnormal uterine bleeding, combined transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound of the pelvis with Doppler is the most appropriate initial imaging study. If the uterus is incompletely visualized with the initial ultrasou2nd, MRI of the pelvis without and with contrast is the next appropriate imaging study, unless a polyp is suspected on the original ultrasound, then sonohysterography can be performed. If the patient continues to experience abnormal uterine bleeding, assessment with ultrasound of the pelvis, sonohysterography, and MRI of the pelvis without and with contrast would be appropriate. 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.

Purpose To identify and define the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and treatment approaches to pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIFs) that develop as a consequence of pelvic radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies. Materials and Methods A systematic literature review (PubMed and Embase indexed from January 1, 1980, to May 1, 2020) of studies describing PIFs that result from radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies. A random-effects model weighted by the inverse variance was used to calculate the pooled crude incidence, actuarial incidence, and proportion of symptomatic PIFs, and to evaluate the relationship between PIF incidence and various risk factors. Results Thirty-eight studies describing PIFs following radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies were reviewed. A meta-analysis of 6488 patients (37 studies) identified the crude incidence of PIF as 9.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8%-12.4%), and a meta-analysis of 2131 patients (9 studies) identified the 5-year actuarial incidence of PIF as 15.3% (95% CI 7.5%-25.0%). Factors that significantly correlated with increased risk of PIF development included evidence of osteoporosis (P Conclusions PIFs cause significant morbidity in gynecologic cancer patients after radiation therapy. In this systematic review, we discuss the incidence and risk factors associated with PIF development as it relates to the different detection methods, radiation techniques, doses, and gynecologic cancers treated. Additional studies are needed to further define prevention and treatment approaches for insufficiency fractures.

Incidental adnexal masses are commonly encountered at ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Since many of these lesions are surgically resected and ultimately found to be benign, patients may be exposed to personal and economic costs related to unnecessary oophorectomy. Thus, accurate non-invasive risk stratification of adnexal masses is essential for optimal management and outcomes. Multiple consensus guidelines in radiology have been published to assist in characterization of these masses as benign, indeterminate, or likely malignant. In the last two years, several new and updated stratification systems for assessment of incidental adnexal masses have been published. The purpose of this article is to offer a concise review of four recent publications: ACR 2020 update on the management of incidental adnexal findings on CT and MRI, SRU 2019 consensus update on simple adnexal cysts, O-RADS ultrasound risk stratification system (2020), and O-RADS MRI risk stratification system (2020).

Placenta accreta spectrum disorder (PASD) is the current terminology recommended by the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) and should replace terms such as abnormally adherent/invasive placenta or morbidly adherent placenta. PASD refers to a variety of potential clinical complications, which may result from abnormal placental implantation. More specifically, placenta accreta refers to a defect in the decidua basalis where the chorionic villi adhere directly to the myometrium with trophoblastic invasion. Accurate antenatal diagnosis is needed to plan for an appropriate delivery strategy at an experienced center in order to reduce maternal and potential fetal morbidity and mortality. Obtaining radiologic and clinical data when PASD is first suspected can play a significant role in formulating an appropriate delivery strategy. Depending on the clinical risk factors and initial imaging findings, transabdominal ultrasound of the pregnant uterus with duplex Doppler and transvaginal ultrasound as needed are the most appropriate imaging procedures. 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.

The most common known causes of female infertility are male factor (26%), ovulatory failure (21%), and tubal damage (14%), while in 28% a couple's infertility remains unexplained. Female-specific causes of infertility include deterioration of oocyte quality with increasing maternal age; ovulatory disorders, most notably polycystic ovarian syndrome; history of salpingitis such as that caused by chlamydia infection; endometriosis; and uterine cavity abnormalities interfering with implantation causing inability to become pregnant or causing recurrent pregnancy loss. These potential causes of female infertility are discussed in this document and the appropriate imaging recommendations for each variant are provided. 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.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules and the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) guidelines for detecting ovarian malignancy in a general population of women presenting to radiology departments with adnexal cystic lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective multicenter study of ultrasound-detected adnexal cystic lesions with appropriate follow-up was conducted. Lesions were classified into benign, indeterminate, or malignant categories according to criteria based on the IOTA simple rules and the SRU guidelines. The prevalence of nonneoplastic cysts, neoplasms, and malignant tumors was calculated. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated, and ROC analysis for the diagnosis of malignancy was performed. RESULTS. A total of 697 women with 764 cystic lesions were included; 85.2% (651/764) of the lesions were nonneoplastic, 12.2% (93/764) were benign neoplasms, and 2.6% (20/764) were malignant neoplasms. Nearly all malignancies were classified into indeterminate and malignant categories. The prevalence of malignancy in the indeterminate category was 4.8% (7/145) (SRU) to 10.7% (7/65) (IOTA) and in the malignant category was 18.1% (13/72) (SRU) to 34.3% (12/35) (IOTA). Only one malignancy was misclassified as benign by the IOTA simple rules. The sensitivity of the IOTA simple rules for malignancy was 90.0%; specificity, 96.5%; PPV, 29.0%; NPV, 99.8%; and accuracy, 96.4%. The corresponding values for the SRU guidelines were 100%, 89.6%, 14.9%, 100%, and 89.8%. In ROC analysis, the IOTA simple rules were slightly more accurate than the SRU guidelines (AUC, 0.9805 versus 0.9713; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION. Both imaging characterization methods were sensitive for identifying ovarian malignancies, but the PPV was low among women presenting to radiology departments, and the indeterminate classification harbored one-third of the total malignancies. Exploration of varied clinical settings and inclusion of secondary tests may help to refine these systems.

Gynecologic cancers impact women of all ages. Some women may wish to preserve their capacity for future childbearing. With appropriate patient selection, acceptable oncologic outcomes may be achieved with preservation of fertility. Determination of eligibility for fertility preservation is guided by patient factors, tumor histology, and preoperative local staging with pelvic MR imaging. The aim of this article is to educate radiologists on the current guidelines for fertility-sparing techniques in women with early stage cervical, endometrial, and ovarian malignancies.

The ACR Incidental Findings Committee (IFC) presents recommendations for managing adnexal masses incidentally detected on CT and MRI. These recommendations represent an update of those provided in our previous JACR 2013 white paper. The Adnexal Subcommittee, which included six radiologists with subspecialty expertise in abdominal imaging or ultrasound and one gynecologist, developed this algorithm. The recommendations draw from published evidence and expert opinion and were finalized by iterative consensus. Algorithm branches successively categorize adnexal masses based on patient characteristics (eg, pre- versus postmenopausal) and imaging features. They terminate with a management recommendation. The algorithm addresses most, but not all, pathologies and clinical scenarios. Our goal is to improve quality of care by providing guidance on how to manage incidentally detected adnexal masses.

Background Several US risk stratification schemas for assessing adnexal lesions exist. These multiple-subcategory systems may be more multifaceted than necessary for isolated adnexal lesions in average-risk women. Purpose To explore whether a US-based classification scheme of classic versus nonclassic appearance can be used to help appropriately triage women at average risk of ovarian cancer without compromising diagnostic performance. Materials and Methods This retrospective multicenter study included isolated ovarian lesions identified at pelvic US performed between January 2011 and June 2014, reviewed between September 2019 and September 2020. Lesions were considered isolated in the absence of ascites or peritoneal implants. Lesions were classified as classic or nonclassic based on sonographic appearance. Classic lesions included simple cysts, hemorrhagic cysts, endometriomas, and dermoids. Otherwise, lesions were considered nonclassic. Outcomes based on histopathologic results or clinical or imaging follow-up were recorded. Diagnostic performance and frequency of malignancy were calculated. Frequency of malignancy between age groups was compared using the χ

IOTA (International Ovarian Tumor Analysis) Simple Rules classifies adnexal masses as benign, malignant, or indeterminate based on sonographic features. We seek to determine if IOTA inappropriately directed women to surgery, or more aggressive surgery, than their final diagnosis warranted. This is a retrospective study of sonographically detected adnexal masses with known clinical outcomes from two institutions (n = 528). Surgically managed patients (n = 172) were categorized based on pathology and compared using Chi-square and t-test for categorical and continuous variables respectively. A logistic regression was used to predict characteristics that predicted surgery or imaging follow up of indeterminate masses. Of the 528 masses imaged, 29% (n = 155) underwent surgery for benign pathology. Only 1.9% (n = 10) underwent surgery after classification as malignant by IOTA for what was ultimately a benign mass. Surgical complications occurred in 10 cases (5.8%), all benign. Fifteen (3.2%) patients went into surgically induced menopause for benign masses, one of which was inaccurately classified by IOTA as malignant. Of the 41 IOTA indeterminate masses, the presence of soft tissue nodules on ultrasound was the only statistically significant predictor of the patient being triaged directly to surgery (OR 1.79, p = 0.04). Our findings support that the IOTA ultrasound classification system can provide clinical guidance without incurring unnecessary surgeries or surgical complications.

In the spring of 2021, the ACR approved a proposal to improve the consistency, transparency, and administrative oversight of the ACR Reporting and Data Systems (RADS). A working group of experts and stakeholders was convened to draft this governance document. Major advances include (1) forming a RADS Steering Committee, (2) establishing minimum requirements and evidence standards for new and existing RADS, and (3) outlining a governance structure and communication strategy for RADS.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the outcomes of ultrasound (US) LI-RADS category US-3 observations detected at US performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening and surveillance on the basis of subsequently performed multi-phase MRI or CT or histopathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this retrospective analysis, 267 patients at high risk for HCC (161 men and 106 women; mean [± SD] age, 58.6 ± 12.2 years) underwent screening liver US between January 2017 and June 2019 and were assigned US-3 observations on a prospective clinical basis using the US LI-RADS algorithm. The results of follow-up imaging studies and/or histopathology were analyzed. RESULTS. Visualization scores assigned at US were A (40.8% [109/267]), B (52.8% [141/267]), and C (6.4% [17/267]). Reasons for US-3 observations included a measurable mass of 1 cm or larger (88.8% [237/267]; mean size, 1.8 ± 1.0 cm; range, 1.0-6.9 cm), an area of parenchymal distortion of 1 cm or greater (7.9% [21/267]; mean size, 1.8 ± 0.9 cm; range, 1.0-4.0 cm), or a new venous thrombus (3.4% [9/267]). Confirmatory testing with multiphase contrast-enhanced MRI or CT or with histopathology was available for 81.6% (218/267) of patients. Causes of US-3 observations included no abnormality at MRI or CT (41.3% [90/218]), a benign lesion (32.6% [71/218]), a LI-RADS category 3 (LR-3) observation at MRI or CT (5.5% [12/218]), a LI-RADS category 4 or 5 (LR-4 or LR-5) observation at MRI or CT or identification of HCC at histopathology (18.8% [41/218]), and an LR-M (denoting probably or definitely malignant but without specific features for HCC) observation at MRI or CT or other malignancy at histopathology (1.8% [4/218]). The PPV of a US-3 observation for probable or definite HCC was 18.8%, and for any malignancy it was 20.6%. CONCLUSION. In the HCC screening population, approximately one in five US-3 observations represents probable or definite HCC at multiphase MRI or CT or HCC at histopathology. These findings support current US LI-RADS guidelines to pursue further evaluation with multiphase cross-sectional imaging for US-3 observations.

Gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD), a rare complication of pregnancy, includes both benign and malignant forms, the latter collectively referred to as gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN). When metastatic, the lungs are the most common site of initial spread. Beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, elaborated to some extent by all forms of GTD, is useful in facilitating disease detection, diagnosis, monitoring treatment response, and follow-up. Imaging evaluation depends on whether GTD manifests in one of its benign forms or whether it has progressed to GTN. Transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound with duplex Doppler evaluation of the pelvis are usually appropriate diagnostic procedures in either of these circumstances, and in posttreatment surveillance. The appropriateness of more extensive imaging remains dependent on a diagnosis of GTN and on other factors. The use of imaging to assess complications, typically hemorrhagic, should be guided by the location of clinical signs and symptoms. 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.

To assess the temporary health impact of prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and transrectal prostate biopsy in an active surveillance prostate cancer population.A two-arm institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant prospective observational patient-reported outcomes study was performed from November 2017 to July 2018. Inclusion criteria were men with Gleason 6 prostate cancer in active surveillance undergoing either prostate mpMRI or transrectal prostate biopsy. A survey instrument was constructed using validated metrics in consultation with the local patient- and family-centered care organization. Study subjects were recruited at the time of diagnostic testing and completed the instrument by phone 24 to 72 hours after testing. The primary outcome measure was summary testing-related quality of life (summary utility score), derived from the testing morbidities index (TMI) (scale: 0 = death and 1 = perfect health). TMI is stratified into seven domains, with each domain scored from 1 (no health impact) to 5 (extreme health impact). Testing-related quality-of-life measures in the two cohorts were compared with Mann-Whitney U test.In all, 122 subjects were recruited, and 90% (110 of 122 [MRI 55 of 60, biopsy 55 of 62]) successfully completed the survey instrument. The temporary quality-of-life impact of transrectal biopsy was significantly greater than that of prostate mpMRI (0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.85, versus 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.97; P.001). The largest mean domain-level difference was for intraprocedural pain (transrectal biopsy 2.6, 95% CI 2.4-2.8, versus mpMRI 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5; P.001).Transrectal prostate biopsy has greater temporary health impact (lower testing-related quality-of-life measure) than prostate mpMRI.

The purpose of this article is to review the current screening guidelines for breast and ovarian cancers in women who test positive for BRCA genetic mutations, and to familiarize radiologists with ...

The US Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was released in 2017 and is the newest of the four American College of Radiology (ACR) LI-RADS algorithms. US LI-RADS provides standardized terminology, technical recommendations, and a reporting framework for US examinations performed for screening or surveillance in patients at risk for developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The appropriate patient population for screening and surveillance includes individuals who are at risk for developing HCC but do not have known or suspected cancer. This includes patients with cirrhosis from any cause and subsets of patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection in the absence of cirrhosis. In an HCC screening or surveillance study, US LI-RADS recommends assigning two scores that apply to the entire study: the US category, which determines follow-up, and a visualization score, which communicates the expected level of sensitivity of the examination but does not affect management. Three US categories are possible: US-1 negative, a study with no evidence of HCC; US-2 subthreshold, a study in which an observation less than 10 mm is depicted that is not definitely benign; and US-3 positive, a study in which an observation greater than or equal to 10 mm or a new thrombus in vein is identified, for which diagnostic contrast material–enhanced imaging is recommended. Three visualization scores are possible: A (no or minimal limitations), B (moderate limitations), and C (severe limitations). (©)RSNA, 2019

Fetal growth restriction, or an estimated fetal weight of less than the 10th percentile, is associated with adverse perinatal outcome. Optimizing management for obtaining the most favorable outcome for mother and fetus is largely based on detailed ultrasound findings. Identifying and performing those ultrasound procedures that are most associated with adverse outcome is necessary for proper patient management. Transabdominal ultrasound is the mainstay of initial management and assessment of fetal growth. For those fetuses that are identified as small for gestational age, assessment of fetal well-being with biophysical profile and Doppler velocimetry provide vital information for differentiating those fetuses that may be compromised and may require delivery and those that are well compensated. Delivery of the pregnancy is primarily based upon the gestational age of the pregnancy and the ultrasound findings. 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.

The authors provide a commentary on the current status of the Abdominal Radiology Fellowship recruitment process, which is not presently governed by a formal Match. Abdominal Radiology is the largest radiology subspecialty fellowship that remains outside of the Match. The Society of Abdominal Radiology convened a task force in 2019 to assess stakeholder viewpoints on a Match and found that the community was divided. Radiology departments and Abdominal Radiology fellowship program directors have voluntarily complied with a series of guidelines laid out by the Society of Chairs in Academic Radiology Departments during the two most recent recruiting cycles, but challenges in the process persist. Stakeholders report improved organization and fairness as a result of these procedural changes, and the authors suggest that Abdominal Radiology may continue to consider a formal fellowship Match in coming years.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare breast cancer characteristics and treatment regimens among women undergoing annual versus nonannual screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this retrospective, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant cohort study, a breast cancer database was queried for patients who received a mammographic or clinical diagnosis of breast cancer during 2016-2017. Annual versus biennial and annual versus nonannual (biennial and triennial) mammography screening cohorts were compared using t tests or Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous variables and chi-square or Fisher exact tests for categoric variables. RESULTS. A total of 490 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer during 2016-2017. Among these women, 245 had an assignable screening frequency and were 40-84 years old (mean, 61.8 ± 9.9 [SD] years; median, 62 years). Screening frequency was annual for 200 of these 245 patients (81.6%), biennial for 32 (13.1%), and triennial for 13 (5.3%). Annual screening resulted in fewer late-stage presentations (AJCC stage II, III, or IV in 48 of 200 patients undergoing annual [24.0%] vs 14 of 32 undergoing biennial [43.8%; p = .02] and vs 20 of 45 undergoing nonannual screening [44.4%; p = .006]), fewer interval cancers (21 of 200 for annual [10.5%] vs 12 of 32 for biennial [37.5%; p < .001] and vs 15 of 45 for nonannual [33.3%; p < .001]), and smaller mean tumor diameter (1.4 ± 1.2 cm for annual vs 1.8 ± 1.6 cm for biennial [p = .04] and vs 1.8 ± 1.5 cm nonannual [p = .03]). Lower AJCC stage, fewer interval cancers, and smaller tumor diameter also persisted among postmenopausal women undergoing annual screening. Patients undergoing biennial and nonannual screening showed nonsignificant greater use of axillary lymph node dissection (annual, 24 of 200 [12.0%]; biennial, 6 of 32 [18.8%]; nonannual, 7 of 45 [15.6%]) and chemotherapy (annual, 55 of 200 [27.5%]; biennial, 12 of 32 [37.5%]; nonannual, 16 of 45 [35.6%]). CONCLUSION. Annual mammographic screening was associated with lower breast cancer stage and fewer interval cancers than biennial or nonannual screening.

Ultrasound has a high specificity for the diagnosis of a benign lesion in cases of classic appearing simple cyst, hemorrhagic cyst, endometrioma and dermoid. However, ultrasound can sometimes be limited for definitive characterisation and risk stratification of other types of lesions, including those with echogenic content that may appear solid, with or without blood flow. Frequently, MRI can be used to further characterise these types of lesions, due to its ability to distinguish solid tissue from non-tissue solid components such as fat, blood, or debris. Incorporating the MR imaging into the evaluation of adnexal lesions can improve diagnostic certainty and guide clinical management potentially avoiding inappropriate surgery for benign lesions and expediting appropriate treatment for malignant lesions, particularly in the females with sonographically indeterminate adnexal lesions.

The American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) risk scoring system has been studied in a selected population of women referred for suspected or known adnexal lesions. This population has a higher frequency of malignant neoplasms than women presenting to radiology departments for pelvic ultrasonography for a variety of indications, potentially impacting the diagnostic performance of the risk scoring system.To evaluate the risk of malignant neoplasm and diagnostic performance of O-RADS US risk scoring system in a multi-institutional, nonselected cohort.This multi-institutional cohort study included a population of nonselected women in the United States who presented to radiology departments for routine pelvic ultrasonography between 2011 and 2014, with pathology confirmation imaging follow up or 2 years of clinical follow up.Analysis of 1014 adnexal lesions using the O-RADS US risk stratification system.Frequency of ovarian cancer and diagnostic performance of the O-RADS US risk stratification system.This study included 913 women with 1014 adnexal lesions. The mean (SD) age of the patients was 42.4 (13.9 years), and 674 of 913 (73.8%) were premenopausal. The overall frequency of malignant neoplasm was 8.4% (85 of 1014 adnexal lesions). The frequency of malignant neoplasm for O-RADS US 2 was 0.5% (3 of 657 lesions;1% expected); O-RADS US 3, 4.5% (5 of 112 lesions;10% expected); O-RADS US 4, 11.6% (18 of 155; 10%-50% expected); and O-RADS 5, 65.6% (59 of 90 lesions;50% expected). O-RADS US 4 was the optimum cutoff for diagnosing cancer with sensitivity of 90.6% (95% CI, 82.3%-95.9%), specificity of 81.9% (95% CI, 79.3%-84.3%), positive predictive value of 31.4% (95% CI, 25.7%-37.7%) and negative predictive value of 99.0% (95% CI, 98.0%-99.6%).In this cohort study of a nonselected patient population, the O-RADS US risk stratification system performed within the expected range as published by the ACR O-RADS US committee. The frequency of malignant neoplasm was at the lower end of the published range, partially because of the lower prevalence of cancer in a nonselected population. However, a high negative predictive value was maintained, and when a lesion can be classified as an O-RADS US 2, the risk of cancer is low, which is reassuring for both clinician and patient.

Rationale and Objectives To assess resident and fellowship program director (PD) perceptions of the abdominal radiology fellowship application process following the first cycle in which an embargo on interviews until December 1, 2019 was set according to the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments (SCARD) timeline for the 2021–2022 abdominal imaging fellowship year. Materials and Methods Eligible study participants included fellowship PDs of all abdominal imaging programs in the United States and residents that attended the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) 2020 Annual Meeting. A questionnaire was developed by content and survey experts, pilot tested, and administered from May to June 2020. Results A total of 39% (36/92) of all PDs and 30% (46/152) of all individuals identified as residents with valid email addresses that attended the SAR 2020 Annual Meeting responded to the survey with an overall response rate of 34%. Only 42% of PDs and 33% of residents supported moving to a match, while 62% of PDs and 70% of residents thought that a match would limit the autonomy of applicants. While most PDs and residents also agreed that the first iteration of the SCARD timeline allowed residents to make a more informed choice, the majority of PDs were dissatisfied with their experience. Most PDs and residents additionally want applications to be accepted no earlier than July and/or August of the R3 year (initial SCARD guidelines did not restrict timing), interviews to begin on November 1st or earlier of the R3 year (compared to December 1st set in the first iteration of the guidelines), and a gap of 2–4 weeks between the date of first interviews and notification of first offers (initial SCARD guidelines did not restrict timing). Lastly, an overwhelming majority of PDs and residents agreed that SAR should enforce the abdominal imaging fellowship application process. Conclusion Following the first cycle of abdominal imaging fellowship applications conducted according to the SCARD guidelines, a majority of trainees and PDs felt the changes were favorable and were opposed to a formal match. Specific suggestions for improvement were elicited from stakeholders and will be incorporated for the next cycle.

MRI is used in the evaluation of ovarian and adnexal lesions. MRI can further characterize lesions seen on ultrasound to help decrease the number of false-positive lesions and avoid unnecessary surgery in benign lesions. Currently, the reporting of ovarian and adnexal findings on MRI is inconsistent due to the lack of standardized descriptor terminology. The development of uniform reporting descriptors can lead to improved interpretation agreement and communication between radiologists and referring physicians. The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems MRI Committee was formed under the direction of the ACR to create a standardized lexicon for adnexal lesions with the goal of improving the quality and consistency of imaging reports. This white paper describes the consensus process in the creation of a standardized lexicon for ovarian and adnexal lesions for MRI and the resultant lexicon.

Incidental adnexal masses are commonly encountered at ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Since many of these lesions are surgically resected and ultimately found to be benign, patients may be exposed to personal and economic costs related to unnecessary oophorectomy. Thus, accurate non-invasive risk stratification of adnexal masses is essential for optimal management and outcomes. Multiple consensus guidelines in radiology have been published to assist in characterization of these masses as benign, indeterminate, or likely malignant. In the last two years, several new and updated stratification systems for assessment of incidental adnexal masses have been published. The purpose of this article is to offer a concise review of four recent publications: ACR 2020 update on the management of incidental adnexal findings on CT and MRI, SRU 2019 consensus update on simple adnexal cysts, O-RADS ultrasound risk stratification system (2020), and O-RADS MRI risk stratification system (2020).