Search

Background and Aim: Breast cancer and normal breast tissue exhibit different degrees of stiffness, indicating distinct biomechanical properties. Study results reveal that breast cancer tissue is several times stiffer than normal breast tissue. These variations can serve as indicative factors for imaging purposes. Depicting markers can significantly enhance the process of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. This article provides a brief review of the biomechanical properties of breast cancer tissue, highlighting the role of the magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) technique in utilizing these properties for diagnosing breast cancer. Methods: In breast MRE, low‐frequency shear waves are employed to measure breast stiffness. This method not only offers a quantitative diagnosis but also generates an elastogram, determining the stiffness of each area through its colors. Results: MRE represents a diagnostic technique with heightened sensitivity, based on depicting the viscoelasticity properties of breast tissue and describing tumors in terms of biomechanical properties. Combining tissue biomechanical properties, such as tissue stiffness, with contrast‐enhanced breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) leads to tumor diagnosis. The value of MRE in oncological imaging aims at the early detection of tumors and evaluating the prognosis of breast cancer. Conclusion: Breast MRE can identify the reduction of interstitial pressure in tumors by detecting changes in tissue stiffness, making it an effective tool for monitoring treatment responses. This technique is safe, repeatable, and highly precise, significantly aiding in patient screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is recognized as the most indicative method for diagnosing prostate cancer. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide a comprehensive evaluation aligned with the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI‐RADS) guidelines, offering an in‐depth insight into the various MRI sequences used in a standard mpMRI protocol. Additionally, it outlines the critical technical requirements necessary to perform a standard mpMRI examination of the prostate, as defined by the PI‐RADS specifications. Methods: European Society of Urogenital Radiology has released PI‐RADS guideline detailing its suggestions aimed at improving the standards of the procedure. The purpose of this guideline is to establish a standard strategy for MRI protocols and image interpretation, aiming to prevent variability in each of the imaging and interpretation stages. Results: A standard mpMRI protocol comprises morphological sequences and functional sequences. Morphological sequences which encompass T1‐ and T2‐weighted images, and various functional sequences include diffusion‐weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI. The PI‐RADS recommendations assert that having a standard and uniform protocol for all MRI centers is imperative. Furthermore, the existence of a standardized checklist for interpreting MRI images can foster greater consensus in the process of diagnosing and treating patients. Conclusion: Standardized protocols and checklists for mpMRI interpretation are essential for achieving greater consensus among radiologists, ultimately leading to improved diagnostic outcomes in prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]