Radiology State-of-the-art Review: Endometriosis Imaging Interpretation and Reporting.

Endometriosis is a common condition impacting approximately 190 million individuals and up to 50% of women with infertility globally. The disease is characterized by endometrial-like tissue located outside of the uterine corpus, which causes cyclical hemorrhage, inflammation, and fibrosis. Based on clinical suspicion or findings at routine transvaginal pelvic US or other prior imaging, dedicated imaging for endometriosis may be warranted with MRI or advanced transvaginal US. Deep endometriosis (DE) in the pelvis includes evaluation for stromal and fibrotic components and architectural distortion resulting from fibrosis and tethering. It is a disease requiring a compartment-based, pattern-recognition approach. MRI has the benefit of global assessment of the pelvis and is effective in assessing for features of malignancy and for evaluating extrapelvic locations. Transvaginal US has the advantage of dynamic maneuvers to assess for adhesions and may achieve higher spatial resolution for assessing the depth of bowel wall invasion. T1-weighted MRI evaluation increases the specificity of diagnosis by identifying hemorrhagic components, but the presence of T1 signal hyperintensity is not essential for diagnosing DE. Endometriosis is a disease with a broad spectrum; understanding the mild through advanced manifestations, including malignancy evaluation, is within the scope and breadth of radiologists' interpretation.

Standardizing Multidisciplinary Case Conferences and Improving Communication Between Referring Physicians and Radiologists: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

Purpose: Assess the effectiveness of standardizing multidisciplinary case conferences (MDCs). Methods: Anonymous electronic surveys gauged opinions of abdominal radiologists engaged in recurring MDCs. A standardized Excel template, following Cancer Care Ontario guidelines and relevant literature, was distributed to MDC managers. Physicians were instructed to send cases 36 hours prior to MDC. Template adherence was assessed at 1.5 and 8 months. A follow-up survey at 4 months evaluated the intervention's effectiveness. Results: 27/34 abdominal radiologists provided 47 baseline responses, and 12 delegated radiologists provided 23 follow-up responses. "Often/always" being provided the image's location increased from 36% (17/47) at baseline to 70% (16/23) at follow-up. Non-adherence to the 36-hour cut-off decreased from 36% (16/45) to 17% (4/23). 72% disagreed that uploading remote imaging to hospital servers is easy (33/46), similar to follow-up (18/23, 78%). In assessing the intervention, 41% noted improved standardization (9/22), another 41% considered MDCs already standardized (9/22), and 18% reported no change (4/22). Those reporting no change experienced a higher frequency of non-adherence to the 36-hour cut-off (3/4, 75%) than others (1/18, 6%), and less frequent "often/always" ratings for image location being provided (3/4, 75%) than others (2/18, 11%). 89% (25/28) of MDCs adhered to the template. Issues regarding last-minute add-on cases may be mitigated through EPIC force functions. Artificial intelligence advancements may assist in retrieving external images and patient information. Conclusion: Adherence to MDC standardization was high, allowing for more efficient preparation, potentially reducing radiologist administrative burdens. Future force functions and artificial intelligence integration into electronic patient records may further augment this.

Current Practice Patterns, Challenges, and Need for Education in Performing and Reporting Advanced Pelvic US and MRI to Investigate Endometriosis: A Survey by the Canadian Association of Radiologists Endometriosis Working Group.

Purpose: The Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) Endometriosis Working Group developed a national survey to evaluate current practice patterns associated with imaging endometriosis using advanced pelvic ultrasound and MRI to inform forthcoming clinical practice guidelines for endometriosis imaging. Methods: The anonymous survey consisted of 36 questions and was distributed electronically to CAR members. The survey contained a mix of multiple choice, Likert scale and open-ended questions intended to collect information about training and certification, current practices and protocols associated with imaging endometriosis, opportunities for quality improvement and continuing professional development. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results. Results: Canadian radiologists were surveyed about their experience with imaging endometriosis. A total of 89 responses were obtained, mostly from Ontario and Quebec. Most respondents were community radiologists, and almost 33% were in their first five years of practice. Approximately 38% of respondents reported that they or their institution performed advanced pelvic ultrasound for endometriosis, with most having done so for less than 5 years, and most having received training during residency or fellowship. 70% of respondents stated they currently interpret pelvic endometriosis MRI, with most having 1-5 years of experience. Conclusion: Many radiologists in Canada do not perform dedicated imaging for endometriosis. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the benefits and limited access to training. However, dedicated imaging can improve patient outcomes and decrease repeated surgeries. The results highlight the importance of developing guidelines for these imaging techniques and promoting a multidisciplinary approach to endometriosis management.

Universal Liver Imaging Lexicon: Imaging Atlas for Research and Clinical Practice.

The use of standardized terms in assessing and reporting disease processes has well-established benefits, such as clear communication between radiologists and other health care providers, improved diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility, and the enhancement and facilitation of research. Recently, the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Steering Committee released a universal liver imaging lexicon. The current version of the lexicon includes 81 vetted and precisely defined terms that are relevant to acquisition of images using all major liver imaging modalities and contrast agents, as well as lesion- and organ-level features. Most terms in the lexicon are applicable to all patients undergoing imaging of the liver, and only a minority of the terms are strictly intended to be used for patients with high risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma. This pictorial atlas familiarizes readers with the liver imaging lexicon and includes discussion of general concepts, providing sample definitions, schematics, and clinical examples for a subset of the terms in the liver imaging lexicon. The authors discuss general, technical, and imaging feature terms used commonly in liver imaging, with the goal of illustrating their use for clinical and research applications. Work of the U.S. Government published under an exclusive license with the RSNA. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

CAR Practice Statement on Advanced Pelvic Ultrasound for Endometriosis.

The Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR) Endometriosis Working Group was tasked with providing guidance and benchmarks to ensure the quality of technique and interpretation for advanced imaging modalities associated with diagnosing endometriosis. This practice statement provides an overview of the state of the art of advanced pelvic ultrasound in the diagnosis and mapping of pelvic endometriosis. While acknowledging that advanced pelvic ultrasound in some practices falls within the scope of clinical colleagues rather than imaging departments, the statement seeks to guide radiologists interested in implementing these techniques into their practice for patients referred for evaluation and diagnosis of endometriosis. The statement covers indications, some components of the ultrasound assessment and technique, reporting, and recommendations for starting an ultrasound endometriosis evaluation program.

Optimizing Outpatient Oral Contrast Use in Abdominal CT-A Radiology Pandemic Response Initiative to Reduce Patient Time in the Waiting Room and Reduce Costs, While Improving Patient Experience.

Purpose: The aim was to reduce outpatient wait time and improve patient experience by optimising oral contrast use. Methods: Our multidisciplinary stakeholder collaboration implemented two simultaneous interventions: (1) Creation of 'oral contrast policy', limiting recommended indications. (2) Creation of a new shorter oral contrast regime (30 vs 60 min). We conducted a retrospective service evaluation of oral contrast use in outpatient (OP) abdominal CT at baseline and post-intervention. Patient wait times were measured and per-patient cost-savings were reported. An image quality review was performed by 2 blinded abdominal radiologists. Patient experience was evaluated with a standard voluntary survey. Statistical analysis was performed comparing baseline and evaluation outcomes using Chi-square or Fisher Exact test for categorical variables and Student's t-test or ANOVA for continuous data. Results: Over 1-month periods, OP CT scans were assessed in baseline (pre-pandemic) n = 575, baseline (pandemic) n = 495 and post-intervention n = 545 groups. Oral contrast use reduced from 420/575, 73.0% at baseline to 178/545, 32.7% post intervention. The turn-around time reduced by 15.8 minutes per patient from 70.3 to 54.5 minutes, P < .001 (Interventions 1 and 2). The diagnostic quality did not differ between the oral contrast regimes (Intervention 2, P = 1.0, P = .08). No repeat CTs were needed due to lack of oral contrast (Intervention 1) or poor opacification (Intervention 2). There was oral contrast cost reductions of 69.1-78.4% (P < .001). Patients reported their overall experience was improved post-intervention (Interventions 1 and 2). Conclusions: Optimising the CT oral contrast service through judicious use and a shorter regime, reduced patient wait times, improved patient experience and preserved diagnostic quality.

Imaging Evaluation of Living Liver Donor Candidates: Techniques, Protocols, and Anatomy.

The need for liver transplants is increasing because the prevalence of liver diseases and the indications for transplants are growing. In response to the shortage of grafts from deceased donors, more transplants are being performed worldwide with grafts from living donors. Radiologic evaluation is an integral component in the assessment of donor candidates to ensure their eligibility and to choose the most appropriate surgical approach. MRI is the preferred modality for evaluation of the liver parenchyma and biliary tree. In most centers, a combination of MRI and CT is used to take advantage of the higher spatial resolution of CT for evaluation of arteries. However, MRI-only assessment is feasible. In addition to assessment of the liver parenchyma for abnormalities such as steatosis, a detailed evaluation of the hepatic vascular and biliary system for pertinent anatomic variants is crucial, because these variants can affect surgical techniques and outcomes in both recipients and donors. In this pictorial article, after a brief review of the most common surgical techniques and postsurgical liver anatomy, the biliary and vascular anatomy are discussed, with specific attention paid to the variants that are pertinent to this surgical procedure. The roles of liver segmentation and volumetric assessment and current imaging techniques and protocols are also discussed. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2021.

User and system pitfalls in liver imaging with LI-RADS.

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 imaging, created specifically for patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Over the past years, LI-RADS has been progressively implemented into clinical practice, but pitfalls remain related to user error and inherent limitations of the system. User pitfalls include the inappropriate application of LI-RADS to a low-risk patient population, incorrect measurement techniques, inaccurate assumptions about LI-RADS requirements, and improper usage of LI-RADS terminology and categories. System pitfalls include areas of discordance with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) as well as pitfalls related to rare ancillary features. This article reviews common user pitfalls in applying LI-RADS v2018 and how to avoid preventable errors and also highlights deficiencies of the current version of LI-RADS and how it might be improved in the future. Level of Evidence:3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1673-1686.

Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2018: Imaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in At-Risk Patients.

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is composed of four individual algorithms intended to standardize the lexicon, as well as reporting and care, in patients with or at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma in the context of surveillance with US; diagnosis with CT, MRI, or contrast material-enhanced US; and assessment of treatment response with CT or MRI. This report provides a broad overview of LI-RADS, including its historic development, relationship to other imaging guidelines, composition, aims, and future directions. In addition, readers will understand the motivation for and key components of the 2018 update.

LI-RADS 2017: An update.

The computed tomography / magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) Liver Imaging Reporting & Data System (LI-RADS) is a standardized system for diagnostic imaging terminology, technique, interpretation, and reporting in patients with or at risk for developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Using diagnostic algorithms and tables, the system assigns to liver observations category codes reflecting the relative probability of HCC or other malignancies. This review article provides an overview of the 2017 version of CT/MRI LI-RADS with a focus on MRI. The main LI-RADS categories and their application will be described. Changes and updates introduced in this version of LI-RADS will be highlighted, including modifications to the diagnostic algorithm and to the optional application of ancillary features. Comparisons to other major diagnostic systems for HCC will be made, emphasizing key similarities, differences, strengths, and limitations. In addition, this review presents the new Treatment Response algorithm, while introducing the concepts of MRI nonviability and viability. Finally, planned future directions for LI-RADS will be outlined. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1459-1474.

Spectrum of Pitfalls, Pseudolesions, and Potential Misdiagnoses in Cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this article are to review a variety of pitfalls in liver imaging that can lead to the inaccurate diagnosis of focal hepatic lesions in cirrhosis, to describe the pathophysiologic processes of these pitfalls, and to provide specific clues for achieving the correct diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Cirrhosis complicates liver imaging. The distortion and replacement of normal liver parenchyma by fibrous and regenerative tissue can change the typical appearance of many benign lesions, causing them to be misinterpreted as malignancy. In addition, the high incidence and prevalence of hepatocellular carcinoma among patients with cirrhosis put radiologists on high alert for any suspicious findings, especially because not all hepatocellular carcinomas have a typical imaging appearance.

LI-RADS Version 2018 Ancillary Features at MRI.

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes performance of liver imaging in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as well as interpretation and reporting of the results. Developed by experts in liver imaging and supported by the American College of Radiology, LI-RADS assigns to observations categories that reflect the relative probability of benignity, HCC, or other malignancy. While category assignment is based mainly on major imaging features, ancillary features may be applied to improve detection and characterization, increase confidence, or adjust LI-RADS categories. Ancillary features are classified as favoring malignancy in general, HCC in particular, or benignity. Those favoring malignancy in general or HCC in particular may be used to upgrade by a maximum of one category up to LR-4; those favoring benignity may be used to downgrade by a maximum of one category. If there are conflicting ancillary features (ie, one or more favoring malignancy and one or more favoring benignity), the category should not be adjusted. Ancillary features may be seen at diagnostic CT, MRI performed with extracellular agents, or MRI performed with hepatobiliary agents, with the exception of one ancillary feature assessed at US. This article focuses on LI-RADS version 2018 ancillary features seen at MRI. Specific topics include rules for ancillary feature application; definitions, rationale, and illustrations with clinical MRI examples; summary of evidence and diagnostic performance; pitfalls; and future directions. ©RSNA, 2018.

Can Thyroid Ultrasonography Predict Substernal Extension or Tracheal Compression in Goiters?

PURPOSE: To determine whether an ultrasonography (US)-defined thyroid volume can accurately predict substernal extension or tracheal narrowing. METHODS: After research ethics approval, we identified patients with thyroid nodules investigated with both US and computed tomography (CT). Reviewers assigned scores for both substernal extension and tracheal compression on CT using pre-established classification systems. Statistical analysis with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to find the US-determined thyroid volume thresholds that correlated with each substernal extension and tracheal compression. RESULTS: This study included 120 patients (mean age 63.4 years; SD ± 15.9; 67% female). Thirty-five patients (29%) had substernal extension. The mean US total thyroid gland volume in patients with and without substernal extension were 92.4 and 37.6 cm3, respectively (P < .001). 86% of patients with substernal extension had tracheal narrowing vs. 27% of patients without substernal extension (P < .0001). A cutoff dominant gland volume of ≥37.5 cm3 showed 83% sensitivity and 79% specificity for substernal extension (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.84). A total thyroid gland volume threshold of ≥37.8 cm3 showed 89% sensitivity and 87% specificity for any degree of tracheal narrowing (AUC = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that US volumes may be used as a predictor to identify those patients with thyroid enlargement who are most at risk of substernal extension and tracheal compression and who may benefit from preoperative CT imaging for optimal surgical and anesthetic planning.

Internal Hernia after Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Optimal CT Signs for Diagnosis and Clinical Decision Making.

Purpose To evaluate the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of internal hernia (IH) in patients who have undergone laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and to develop decision tree models to optimize diagnostic accuracy. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective, ethics-approved study of patients who had undergone laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with surgically confirmed IH (n = 76) and without IH (n = 78). Two radiologists independently reviewed each examination for the following previously established CT signs of IH: mesenteric swirl, small-bowel obstruction (SBO), mushroom sign, clustered loops, hurricane eye, small bowel behind the superior mesenteric artery, and right-sided anastomosis. Radiologists also evaluated images for two new signs, superior mesenteric vein (SMV) "beaking" and "criss-cross" of the mesenteric vessels. Overall impressions for diagnosis of IH were recorded. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement were calculated, and multivariate recursive partitioning was performed to evaluate various decision tree models by using the CT signs. Results Accuracy and interobserver agreement regarding the nine CT signs of IH showed considerable variation. The best signs were mesenteric swirl (sensitivity and specificity, 86%-89% and 86%-90%, respectively; κ = 0.74) and SMV beaking (sensitivity and specificity, 80%-88% and 94%-95%, respectively; κ = 0.83). Overall reader impression yielded the highest sensitivity and specificity (96%-99% and 90%-99%, respectively; κ = 0.79). The decision tree model with the highest overall accuracy and sensitivity included mesenteric swirl and SBO, with a diagnostic odds ratio of 154 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 146, 161), sensitivity of 96% (95% CI: 87%, 99%), and specificity of 87% (95% CI: 75%, 93%). The decision tree with the highest specificity included SMV beaking and SBO, with a diagnostic odds ratio of 105 (95% CI: 101, 109), sensitivity of 90% (95% CI: 79%, 95%), and specificity of 92% (95% CI: 83%, 97%). Conclusion The decision tree with the highest accuracy and sensitivity for diagnosis of IH included mesenteric swirl and SBO, the model with the highest specificity included SMV beaking and SBO, and the remaining signs showed lower accuracy and/or poor to fair interobserver agreement. Overall reader impression yielded the highest accuracy for diagnosis of IH, likely because alternate diagnoses not incorporated in the models were considered. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

2017 Version of LI-RADS for CT and MR Imaging: An Update.

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a reporting system created for the standardized interpretation of liver imaging findings in patients who are at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This system was developed with the cooperative and ongoing efforts of an American College of Radiology-supported committee of diagnostic radiologists with expertise in liver imaging and valuable input from hepatobiliary surgeons, hepatologists, hepatopathologists, and interventional radiologists. In this article, the 2017 version of LI-RADS for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging is reviewed. Specific topics include the appropriate population for application of LI-RADS; technical recommendations for image optimization, including definitions of dynamic enhancement phases; diagnostic and treatment response categories; definitions of major and ancillary imaging features; criteria for distinguishing definite HCC from a malignancy that might be non-HCC; management options following LI-RADS categorization; and reporting. ©RSNA, 2017.

Quality Initiative Program in Its Sixth Year: Has It Become Part of Our Radiology Culture?

PURPOSE: The study sought to determine if the Quality Initiative Program (QUIP) has become part of the radiology culture at our institution. METHODS: After Research Ethics approval, QUIPs from January 2009 to December 2014 were assessed. We evaluated the response rates of radiologists receiving QUIPs to ensure they reviewed them. We performed a survey of radiologists and trainees to gain feedback regarding their perception of QUIPs in February 2014 and in June 2015. RESULTS: Response rates of radiologists receiving a QUIP improved, with 76% response rate in 2014 up from 66% in the first year and 42% in the second year. Based on the 2015 survey including radiologists and trainees, 75% agreed that QUIPs were educational, compared with 67% 16 months earlier. Fifty percent of respondents had changed their overall practice of reporting based on feedback from the QUIP in 2015 compared with 32% in 2014. In both surveys, 100% of respondents indicated that QUIPs have not been used against them for any disciplinary measure (or other negatively perceived action). When asked if there was a perceived decrease in stigma felt when a QUIP was received, 71% agreed or were neutral and 28% disagreed. CONCLUSIONS: The QUIP is educational to radiologists and trainees, leading to positive changes in clinical practice. The majority accepts this program but there is still a stigma felt when a QUIP is received, particularly among residents. Nevertheless, we feel that QUIP has been integrated into our radiology culture and, hopefully, imminent transition to commercial quality software will be smooth.

Oral contrast for CT in patients with acute non-traumatic abdominal and pelvic pain: what should be its current role?

Positive oral contrast agents, including barium suspensions and water-soluble iodinated solutions, have traditionally been used in conjunction with the CT evaluation of patients with abdominal and pelvic pain. Due to continued advancements in CT technology, and due to increasing obesity and correspondingly a general increase in the intra-abdominal and intra-pelvic fat separating bowel loops in North American patients and in patients in other parts of the world over the past few decades, the ability of radiologists to accurately evaluate the cause of acute symptoms has substantially improved. Recent research and evolving imaging society guidelines/systematic reviews increasingly support performing CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis without the need for positive oral contrast in these types of adult patient populations, in most clinical situations. Increased patient throughput, patient preference, patient safety, and most importantly, retention of high diagnostic accuracy, are reasons for this recent change in practice to routinely omit the use of enteric contrast agents for the majority of patients presenting with acute abdominal and pelvic pain whom are undergoing emergency CT.