Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Contrast-Enhanced US Nonradiation Treatment Response Assessment Version 2024.

The American College of Radiology Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes the imaging technique, reporting lexicon, disease categorization, and management for patients with or at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LI-RADS encompasses HCC surveillance with US; HCC diagnosis with CT, MRI, or contrast-enhanced US (CEUS); and treatment response assessment (TRA) with CT or MRI. LI-RADS was recently expanded to include CEUS TRA after nonradiation locoregional therapy or surgical resection. This report provides an overview of LI-RADS CEUS Nonradiation TRA v2024, including a lexicon of imaging findings, techniques, and imaging criteria for posttreatment tumor viability assessment. LI-RADS CEUS Nonradiation TRA v2024 takes into consideration differences in the CEUS appearance of viable tumor and posttreatment changes within and in close proximity to a treated lesion. Due to the high sensitivity of CEUS to vascular flow, posttreatment reactive changes commonly manifest as areas of abnormal perilesional enhancement without washout, especially in the first 3 months after treatment. To improve the accuracy of CEUS for nonradiation TRA, different diagnostic criteria are used to evaluate tumor viability within and outside of the treated lesion margin. Broader criteria for intralesional enhancement increase sensitivity for tumor viability detection. Stricter criteria for perilesional enhancement limit miscategorization of posttreatment reactive changes as viable tumor. Finally, the TRA algorithm reconciles intralesional and perilesional tumor viability assessment and assigns a single LI-RADS treatment response (LR-TR) category: LR-TR nonviable, LR-TR equivocal, or LR-TR viable.

Real-time Interobserver Agreement in Bowel Ultrasonography for Diagnostic Assessment in Patients With Crohn's Disease: An International Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The unavailability of standardized parameters in bowel ultrasonography (US) commonly used in Crohn's disease (CD) and the shortage of skilled ultrasonographers are 2 limiting factors in the use of this imaging modality around the world. The aim of this study is to evaluate interobserver agreement among experienced sonographers in the evaluation of bowel US parameters in order to improve standardization in imaging reporting and interpretation. METHODS: Fifteen patients with an established diagnosis of CD underwent blinded bowel US performed by 6 experienced sonographers. Prior to the evaluation, the sonographers and clinical and radiological IBD experts met to formally define the US parameters. Interobserver agreement was tested with the Quatto method (s). RESULTS: All operators agreed on the presence/absence of CD lesions and distinguished absence of/mild activity or moderate/severe lesions in all patients. S values were moderate for bowel wall thickness (s = 0.48, P = n.s.), bowel wall pattern (s = 0.41, P = n.s.), vascularization (s = 0.52, P = n.s.), and presence of lymphnodes (s = 0.61, P = n.s.). Agreement was substantial for lesion location (s = 0.68, P = n.s.), fistula (s = 0.74, P = n.s.), phlegmon (s = 0.78, P = 0.04), and was almost perfect for abscess (s = 0.95, P = 0.02). Poor agreement was observed for mesenteric adipose tissue alteration, lesion extent, stenosis, and prestenotic dilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the majority of the US parameters used in CD showed moderate/substantial agreement. The development of shared US imaging interpretation patterns among sonographers will lead to improved comparability of US results among centers and facilitate the development of multicenter studies and the spread of bowel US training, thereby allowing a wider adoption of this useful technique.

Elastography Assessment of Liver Fibrosis: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus Conference Statement.

The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a panel of specialists from radiology, hepatology, pathology, and basic science and physics to arrive at a consensus regarding the use of elastography in the assessment of liver fibrosis in chronic liver disease. The panel met in Denver, Colo, on October 21-22, 2014, and drafted this consensus statement. The recommendations in this statement are based on analysis of current literature and common practice strategies and are thought to represent a reasonable approach to the noninvasive assessment of diffuse liver fibrosis.

Economic impact of an ultrasonographic contrast agent on the diagnosis and initial management of patients with suspected renal artery stenosis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine resource use in the diagnosis and management of Canadian hypertensive patients with suspected renal artery stenosis and to estimate the impact of diagnosis with contrast-enhanced duplex Doppler ultrasonography (US) on resource use. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight patients with suspected renal artery stenosis underwent usual diagnostic tests (captopril-enhanced renal scintigraphy or duplex Doppler US) and contrast-enhanced US. A management pathway ("planned") describing the medical resources required for further patient care was outlined on the basis of results from each test (separately), and a modified management pathway ("recommended"), which considered data from both diagnostic methods, was also outlined. Medical resources and productivity losses were assessed prospectively for a 3-month period after patients underwent both tests ("actual" management pathway). RESULTS: With usual diagnostic methods, 14 (18%) of the tests were inconclusive, whereas only 1 (1%) of the enhanced US examinations was inconclusive; the cost-efficacy ratio was $422 and $343 per successful diagnosis, respectively. Further management costs for patients with an inconclusive diagnosis were estimated at $6370 after the usual diagnostic tests, but only $1278 with enhanced US. Although the costs of the planned and recommended management pathways were similar ($227 and $294 per patient respectively), the proportion of patients requiring further resources was lower with enhanced US (56% v. 46%). Three-month actual management costs ranged from $121 to $1605 per patient (mean $360). Diagnostic tests and surgical procedures were the major cost drivers in all pathways, and costs were highest for patients in whom stenosis was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with suspected renal artery stenosis, contrast-enhanced US had a higher diagnostic success rate than usual diagnostic methods and afforded savings through lower administrative costs and lower medical resource consumption for patients whose diagnosis was unclear after usual diagnostic tests.