Search

Objectives: Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is widely used for evaluating the fallopian tubes; however, controversies regarding the use of water- or oil-based iodine-based contrast media (CM) remain. The aim of this work was (1) to discuss reported pregnancy rates related to the CM type used, (2) to validate the used CM in published literature, (3) to discuss possible complications and side effects of CM in HSG, and (4) to develop guidelines on the use of oil-based CM in HSG. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for original RCT studies or review/meta-analyses on using water-based and oil-based CM in HSG with fertility outcomes and complications. Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 reviews/meta-analyses were analyzed. Grading of the literature was performed based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) 2011 classification. Results: An approximately 10% higher pregnancy rate is reported for oil-based CM. Side effects are rare, but oil-based CM have potentially more side effects on the maternal thyroid function and the peritoneum. Conclusions: 1. HSG with oil-based CM gives approximately 10% higher pregnancy rates. 2. External validity is limited, as in five of nine RCTs, the CM used is no longer on the market. 3. Oil-based CM have potentially more side effects on the maternal thyroid function and on the peritoneum. 4. Guideline: Maternal thyroid function should be tested before HSG with oil-based CM and monitored for 6 months after. Clinical relevance statement: Oil-based CM is associated with an approximately 10% higher chance of pregnancy compared to water-based CM after HSG. Although side effects are rare, higher iodine concentration and slower clearance of oil-based CM may induce maternal thyroid function disturbance and peritoneal inflammation and granuloma formation. Key Points: • It is unknown which type of contrast medium, oil-based or water-based, is the optimal for HSG. • Oil-based contrast media give a 10% higher chance of pregnancy after HSG, compared to water-based contrast media. • From the safety perspective, oil-based CM can cause thyroid dysfunction and an intra-abdominal inflammatory response in the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Early, accurate diagnosis is crucial for the prognosis of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. To this end, standardization of imaging algorithms, technical requirements, and reporting is therefore a prerequisite. Since the first European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) consensus in 2015, technical achievements, further insights into specific entities, and the revised WHO-classification (2020) and AJCC staging system (2017) made an update necessary. The guidelines are intended to support radiologists in their decision-making and contribute to interdisciplinary tumor board discussions. Materials and methods: A validated Delphi method based on peer-reviewed literature was used to derive consensus among a panel of 46 specialized musculoskeletal radiologists from 12 European countries. Statements were scored online by level of agreement (0 to 10) during two iterative rounds. Either "group consensus," "group agreement," or "lack of agreement" was achieved. Results: Eight sections were defined that finally contained 145 statements with comments. Overall, group consensus was reached in 95.9%, and group agreement in 4.1%. This communication contains the first part consisting of the imaging algorithm for suspected soft tissue tumors, methods for local imaging, and the role of tumor centers. Conclusion: Ultrasound represents the initial triage imaging modality for accessible and small tumors. MRI is the modality of choice for the characterization and local staging of most soft tissue tumors. CT is indicated in special situations. In suspicious or likely malignant tumors, a specialist tumor center should be contacted for referral or teleradiologic second opinion. This should be done before performing a biopsy, without exception. Clinical relevance: The updated ESSR soft tissue tumor imaging guidelines aim to provide best practice expert consensus for standardized imaging, to support radiologists in their decision-making, and to improve examination comparability both in individual patients and in future studies on individualized strategies. Key Points: • Ultrasound remains the best initial triage imaging modality for accessible and small suspected soft tissue tumors. • MRI is the modality of choice for the characterization and local staging of soft tissue tumors in most cases; CT is indicated in special situations. Suspicious or likely malignant tumors should undergo biopsy. • In patients with large, indeterminate or suspicious tumors, a tumor reference center should be contacted for referral or teleradiologic second opinion; this must be done before a biopsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pharmacokinetics of contrast media (CM) will determine how long safe waiting intervals between successive CT or MRI examinations should be. The Contrast Media Safety Committee has reviewed the data on pharmacokinetics of contrast media to suggest safe waiting intervals between successive contrast-enhanced imaging studies in relation to the renal function of the patient. Clinical relevance statement: Consider a waiting time between elective contrast-enhanced CT and (coronary) angiography with successive iodine-based contrast media administrations in patients with normal renal function (eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) of optimally 12 h (near complete clearance of the previously administered iodine-based contrast media) and minimally 4 h (if clinical indication requires rapid follow-up). Key Points: • Pharmacokinetics of contrast media will guide safe waiting times between successive administrations. • Safe waiting times increase with increasing renal insufficiency. • Iodine-based contrast media influence MRI signal intensities and gadolinium-based contrast agents influence CT attenuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive technique for detecting inflammatory demyelinating lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS) and plays a crucial role in diagnosis and monitoring treatment effectiveness, and for predicting the disease course. In clinical practice, detection of MS lesions is mainly based on T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted sequences. Contrast-enhancing lesions (CEL) on T1-weighted sequences are related to (sub)acute inflammation, while new or enlarging T2 lesions reflect the permanent footprint from a previous acute inflammatory demyelinating event. These two types of MRI features provide redundant information, at least in regular monitoring of the disease. Due to the concern of gadolinium deposition after repetitive injections of gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs), scientific organizations and regulatory agencies in Europe and North America have proposed that these contrast agents should be administered only if clinically necessary. In this article, we provide data on the mode of action of GBCAs in MS, the indications of the use of these agents in clinical practice, their value in MS for diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring purposes, and their use in specific populations (children, pregnant women, and breast-feeders). We discuss imaging strategies that achieve the highest sensitivity for detecting CELs in compliance with the safety regulations established by different regulatory agencies. Finally, we will briefly discuss some alternatives to the use of GBCA for detecting blood–brain barrier disruption in MS lesions. Clinical relevance statement: Although use of GBCA at diagnostic workup of suspected MS is highly valuable for diagnostic and prognostic purposes, their use in routine monitoring is not mandatory and must be reduced, as detection of disease activity can be based on the identification of new or enlarging lesions on T2-weighted images. Key Points: • Both the EMA and the FDA state that the use of GBCA in medicine should be restricted to clinical scenarios in which the additional information offered by the contrast agent is required. • The use of GBCA is generally recommended in the diagnostic workup in subjects with suspected MS and is generally not necessary for routine monitoring in clinical practice. • Alternative MRI-based approaches for detecting acute focal inflammatory MS lesions are not yet ready to be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The revised European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) consensus guidelines on soft tissue tumor imaging represent an update of 2015 after technical advancements, further insights into specific entities, and revised World Health Organization (2020) and AJCC (2017) classifications. This second of three papers covers algorithms once histology is confirmed: (1) standardized whole-body staging, (2) special algorithms for non-malignant entities, and (3) multiplicity, genetic tumor syndromes, and pitfalls., Materials and Methods: A validated Delphi method based on peer-reviewed literature was used to derive consensus among a panel of 46 specialized musculoskeletal radiologists from 12 European countries. Statements that had undergone interdisciplinary revision were scored online by the level of agreement (0 to 10) during two iterative rounds, that could result in 'group consensus', 'group agreement', or 'lack of agreement'., Results: The three sections contain 24 statements with comments. Group consensus was reached in 95.8% and group agreement in 4.2%. For whole-body staging, pulmonary MDCT should be performed in all high-grade sarcomas. Whole-body MRI is preferred for staging bone metastasis, with [ 18 F]FDG-PET/CT as an alternative modality in PET-avid tumors. Patients with alveolar soft part sarcoma, clear cell sarcoma, and angiosarcoma should be screened for brain metastases. Special algorithms are recommended for entities such as rhabdomyosarcoma, extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma, myxoid liposarcoma, and neurofibromatosis type 1 associated malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Satisfaction of search should be avoided in potential multiplicity., Conclusion: Standardized whole-body staging includes pulmonary MDCT in all high-grade sarcomas; entity-dependent modifications and specific algorithms are recommended for sarcomas and non-malignant soft tissue tumors., Clinical Relevance Statement: These updated ESSR soft tissue tumor imaging guidelines aim to provide support in decision-making, helping to avoid common pitfalls, by providing general and entity-specific algorithms, techniques, and reporting recommendations for whole-body staging in sarcoma and non-malignant soft tissue tumors., Key Points: An early, accurate, diagnosis is crucial for the prognosis of patients with soft tissue tumors. These updated guidelines provide best practice expert consensus for standardized imaging algorithms, techniques, and reporting. Standardization can improve the comparability examinations and provide databases for large data analysis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To develop imaging guidelines for patients with fistula-in-ano and other causes of anal sepsis.Methods: An expert group of 13 members of the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) used a modified Delphi process to vote on a series of consensus statements relating to the imaging of patients with potential anal sepsis. Participants first completed a questionnaire to gather practice information and to help frame the statements posed.Results: In the first round of voting, the expert group scored 51 statements of which 45 (88%) achieved immediate consensus. The remaining 6 statements were redrafted following input from the expert group and consensus achieved for all during a second round of voting, including an additional statement drafted. No statement was rejected due to a lack of consensus. After redrafting to improve clarity, 53 individual statements were presented.Conclusion: These expert consensus statements can be used to guide appropriate indication, acquisition, interpretation and reporting of medical imaging for patients with potential fistula-in-ano and other causes of anal sepsis.Key Points: • Medical imaging, notably magnetic resonance imaging, is used widely for the diagnosis and monitoring of fistula-in-ano and other causes of anal and perianal sepsis. • While the indexed medical literature is clear that diagnostic accuracy is potentially excellent, this depends on competent image acquisition and interpretation. • In order to facilitate this, the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) has produced expert consensus guidelines regarding the imaging of fistula-in-ano and related conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare diagnostic performances of current guidelines for the diagnosis of HCC in LT candidates using gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MRI (Gd-EOB-MRI).Methods: Eighty-one patients (119 HCCs and 35 non-HCCs) who underwent preoperative Gd-EOB-MRI and subsequent LT were included. Per-lesion imaging diagnoses of HCCs were made using four different guidelines (American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD), European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL), and Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) guidelines, and patient allocation was determined according to Milan criteria (MC). Comparisons of per-lesion sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of patient allocation between guidelines were performed using logistic regression with generalized estimating equations.Results: For diagnosis of HCC, AASLD guideline showed highest specificity (97.4%), followed by EASL and KLCA-NCC guidelines (92.1% and 92.1%, p > 0.99 and = 0.15, respectively, in comparison to AASLD), while the specificity of APASL guideline was significantly lower than that of AASLD guideline (78.9% vs. 97.4%, p = 0.006). APASL and KLCA-NCC guidelines (75.9% and 65.6%) showed significantly higher sensitivities than AASLD/EASL guidelines (34.5% and 38.8%, respectively; all ps < 0.001). For organ allocation, KLCA-NCC guideline showed higher accuracy in selecting unsuitable candidates (with non-HCC malignancies or beyond MC HCCs) than EASL guideline (68.4% vs. 31.8%; p = 0.001).Conclusion: For the diagnosis of HCCs using Gd-EOB-MRI, AASLD guideline provided the highest specificity, followed by EASL, KLCA-NCC, and APASL guidelines with statistically significant difference with only APASL guideline. KLCA-NCC guideline provided the most accurate selection of unsuitable LT candidates.Key Points: • AASLD/LI-RADS showed the highest specificity, followed by EASL and KLCA-NCC guidelines. • APASL and KLCA-NCC guidelines allowed more sensitive diagnoses of HCCs. • KLCA-NCC more accurately classified patients not appropriate transplantation candidates than EASL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study was conducted in order to assess the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) treatment response (TR) (LR-TR) categorization on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (Gd-EOB-MRI) for detecting viable tumors in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with locoregional treatment (LRT) and to investigate the added value of ancillary features (AFs) to conventional enhancement-based criteria.Methods: This retrospective study included 183 patients with Gd-EOB-MRI after LRT for HCC and appropriate reference standards for tumor viability (84 viable and 99 nonviable). Two independent radiologists assigned per-lesion mRECIST and TR categories (TR-nonviable, TR-equivocal, or TR-viable) according to the LR-TR algorithm and modified LR-TR algorithms including mLR-TR(TP) allowing transitional phase (TP) washout and mLR-TR(AF) allowing category adjustment by applying AFs. Diagnostic performances of imaging criteria were compared using the Cochran's Q test with post hoc analysis.Results: For detecting viable tumors, LR-TR-viable resulted in sensitivities of 64.5%/39.3% and specificities of 98.0%/98.0% in reviewers 1/2. In comparison to LR-TR-viable, mRECIST-viable, mLR-TR(TP)-viable, and mLR-TR(AF)-viable showed significantly higher sensitivities (92.9%/94.0%, 77.4%/56.6%, and 86.9%/83.3% in reviewers 1/2) (ps < 0.001). The specificity of mRECIST-viable (73.7%/62.6%) was significantly lower than that of LR-TR-viable (ps < 0.001), while those of mLR-TR(TP)-viable and mLR-TR(AF)-viable were greater than 95% (98.0%/96.0% and 97.0%/96.0%), statistically equivalent to LR-TR-viable (ps > 0.05). TR-equivocal was least assigned on mLR-TR(AF) (1.1%/7.7%) than LR-TR (15.8%/32.2%) or mLR-TR(TP) (6.6%/23.5%) in both reviewers.Conclusion: The LR-TR algorithm on Gd-EOB-MRI provides a specific diagnosis of viable tumor but with limited sensitivity. By applying AFs in the category adjustment, more sensitive and confident diagnosis can be achieved without significant loss of specificity.Key Points: • The LI-RADS treatment response (LR-TR) algorithm on Gd-EOB-MRI provides a highly specific diagnosis of viable HCC but with limited sensitivity. • The inferior sensitivity of LR-TR-viable category to that of mRECIST can be improved by applying ancillary features in the category adjustment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To validate new diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging (Gd-EOB-MRI) using hypointensity on the hepatobiliary phase (HBP) as an alternative to washout in combination with ancillary features.Methods: This retrospective study included 288 patients at high risk for HCC with 387 nodules (HCCs, n=292; non-HCCs, n=95) showing arterial phase hyper-enhancement (APHE) ≥1 cm on Gd-EOB-MRI. Imaging diagnoses of HCCs were made using different criteria: APHE plus hypointensity on the portal venous phase (PVP) (criterion 1), APHE plus hypointensity on the PVP and/or transitional phase (TP) (criterion 2), APHE plus hypointensity on the PVP and/or TP and/or HBP (criterion 3), and criterion 3 plus non-LR-1/2/M according to the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2017 considering ancillary features (criterion 4). Sensitivities and specificities of those criteria were compared using McNemar's test.Results: Among diagnostic criteria for HCCs, criteria 3 and 4 showed significantly higher sensitivities (93.8% and 92.5%, respectively) than criteria 1 and 2 (70.9% and 86.6%, respectively) (p values <0.001). The specificity of criterion 4 (87.4%) was shown to be significantly higher than that of criterion 3 (48.4%, p<0.001), albeit comparable to criterion 2 (86.3%, p>0.999) and significantly lower than criterion 1 (97.9%, p=0.002).Conclusions: In the non-invasive diagnosis of HCCs on Gd-EOB-MRI, HBP hypointensity may be used as an alternative to washout enabling a highly sensitive diagnosis with little loss in specificity if it is used after excluding nodules considered to be benignities or non-HCC malignancies based on characteristic imaging features.Key Points: • Gd-EOB-MRI enhancement and ancillary features can be used to diagnose HCC. • Exclusion of LR-1/2/M improves specificity when HBP hypointensity is used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered a helpful diagnostic tool in breast imaging, discussions are ongoing about appropriate protocols and indications. The European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) launched a survey to evaluate the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice.Methods: An online survey reviewed by the EUSOBI board and committees was distributed amongst members. The questions encompassed: training and experience; annual breast MRI and MRI-guided-intervention workload; examination protocols; indications; reporting habits and preferences. Data were summarised and subgroups compared using χ2 test.Results: Of 647 EUSOBI members, 177 (27.4%) answered the survey. The majority were radiologists (90.5%), half of them based in academic centres (51.9%). Common indications for MRI included cancer staging, treatment monitoring, high-risk screening and problem-solving, and differed significantly between countries (p≤0.03). Structured reporting and BI-RADS were mostly used. Breast radiologists with ≤10 years of experience preferred inclusion of additional techniques, such as T2/STIR (p=0.03) and DWI (p=0.08) in the scan protocol. MRI-guided interventions were performed by a minority of participants (35.4%).Conclusions: The utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice is generally in line with international recommendations. There are substantial differences between countries. MRI-guided interventions and functional MRI parameters are not widely available.Key Points: • MRI is commonly used for the detection and characterisation of breast lesions. • Clinical practice standards are generally in line with current recommendations. • Standardised criteria and diagnostic categories (mainly BI-RADS) are widely adopted. • Younger radiologists value additional techniques, such as T2/STIR and DWI. • MRI-guided breast biopsy is not widely available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]