[Eponyms in musculoskeletal radiology: stories of bones, persons, and civilizations]. / Epónimos en radiología del esqueleto: cuentos de huesos, hombres y civilizaciones.

Eponyms reflect the history of medicine, of disease, and of physicians, but eponyms also reflect the history of the societies in which these physicians lived. Both loved and hated, eponyms are at the center of an interminable debate about whether they should continue to be used or whether they should disappear, and this debate has become more intense since some scientific societies have purged their terminologies of eponyms related to Nazism. Eponyms abound in conventional musculoskeletal radiology. In this article, rather than attempt an exhaustive review of all these eponyms, we take a few representative examples to illustrate the contributions of eponyms to medicine and the history of medicine.

Urgent and unexpected findings in oncology and hematology patients: A practical approach to imaging.

Urgent and unexpected findings are very common in oncology and haematology patients. This article reviews the most important points included in the European Society of Radiology's guidelines and proposes a practical approach to reporting and communicating these findings more efficiently. This approach is explained with illustrative examples. Radiologists can provide added value in the management of these findings by helping referring clinicians reach the best decisions. To this end, it is essential to know the imaging manifestations of the most common findings that must be reported urgently, such as the specific toxicity of different treatments, the complications of tumours and catheters, infections, and thrombosis. Moreover, it is crucial to consider the individual patient's treatment, risk factors, clinical situation, and immune status.

Urgent and unexpected findings in oncology and hematology patients: a practical approach to imaging. / Hallazgos urgentes e inesperados en los pacientes oncohematológicos. Propuestas prácticas en radiología.

Urgent and unexpected findings are very common in oncology and hematology patients. This article reviews the most important points included in the European Society of Radiology's guidelines and proposes a practical approach to reporting and communicating these findings more efficiently. This approach is explained with illustrative examples. Radiologists can provide added value in the management of these findings by helping referring clinicians reach the best decisions. To this end, it is essential to know the imaging manifestations of the most common findings that must be reported urgently, such as the specific toxicity of different treatments, the complications of tumors and catheters, infections, and thrombosis. Moreover, it is crucial to consider the individual patient's treatment, risk factors, clinical situation, and immune status.

Investigation of patterns of nodal metastases in BRAF mutant lung cancer.

Axillary lymph nodes (axLN) are a rare site of nodal metastases in patients with lung cancer. BRAF mutated lung cancer is a genetically distinct subtype that occurs in 2-5% of non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC). A recent study identified a highly unusual pattern of metastatic spread to axLN in patients with BRAF mutated colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of the study is to assess the incidence of axLN metastases in BRAF mutated NSCLC. Baseline computed tomography (CT) imaging at diagnosis and all follow up CTs of patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC treated at our institution were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists for evidence of axLN metastases. Positron emission tomography (PET)/CT was reviewed when available. A control group of patients with non-BRAF mutated NSCLC was assessed. Three criteria were used for the diagnosis of a metastatic node; pathologic confirmation, radiologic size greater ≥1.5cm in short axis diameter or fluorodeoxyglucose avidity on PET/CT and radiologic size ≥1.0cm in short axis diameter. Forty-six patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC and CT images on the institutional PACS were identified. 7 (15%) patients with BRAF mutated NSCLC had axLN metastases using the proposed diagnostic criteria. One patient had a pathologic proven axLN metastasis, 3 had axLNs measuring ≥1.5cm in short axis, and 3 had nodes which were FDG avid on PET/CT and measured ≥1.0cm in short axis. By comparison, 1 of 46 (2%) control patients with non-BRAF mutated NSCLC had axLN metastases. Previous series have reported the prevalence of axLN metastases in patients with NSCLC as 0.61-0.75%. We have found a higher incidence of axLN metastases in BRAF mutated NSCLC patients than described in non-BRAF mutated NSCLC patients. Examination of the axilla should be a routine part of physical examination in this genetically distinct subgroup of lung cancer patients.