MRI of common penile pathologies and penile prostheses.

MRI can delineate finer details of penile anatomy and pathology due to inherent higher soft-tissue contrast and spatial resolution. It can characterize inflammation and identify abscesses, localize penile fractures, guide surgical planning in penile fibrosis and Peyronie's disease, and depict components of the penile prosthesis and its complications. MRI is a great investigative tool for penile neoplasms, including locally infiltrative neoplasms where clinical examination is limited, and local staging is crucial for surgical planning.

The LACSEMS: what radiologists need to know.

Endoscopic drainage is increasingly used in lieu of percutaneous or surgical drainage of pancreatitis-related fluid collections. The lumen-apposing, covered, self-expanding, metallic stent (LACSEMS) is a newly produced stent for the transmural drainage of such fluid collections. The use of LACSEMS devices requires close coordination between knowledgeable radiologic and gastrointestinal providers. We review pancreatitis-related fluid collections and show examples from our experience with LACSEMS and the appropriate case selection, planning, deployment, and follow-up for this novel device.

Knife wielding radiologist: A case report of primary pancreatic lymphoma.

Majority of malignant pancreatic neoplasms are epithelial in origin and mostly arise from exocrine gland. Ductal adenocarcinoma compromises the major histological type of such tumors. Primary non-epithelial tumors of exocrine pancreatic gland are extremely rare and incorporate lymphoma and sarcoma. Primary pancreatic lymphoma compromises less than 0.5% of pancreatic malignancies. Primary pancreatic lymphoma can be difficult to differentiate from pancreatic adenocarcinoma and other neoplasms on imaging, and a correct diagnosis is crucial for appropriate patient management.

Optimal reference mammography: a comparison of mammograms obtained 1 and 2 years before the present examination.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed and compared the benefit of using images acquired 1 year or 2 years previously during mammography interpretations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven radiologists and one resident reviewed 128 cases three times: once without prior mammograms for comparison, once with mammograms from the most recent (1 year) examination, and once with mammograms acquired 2 years previously. They were asked to determine whether the patient should be recalled for additional procedures. Performances under the three conditions were compared. RESULTS: Radiologists were significantly more accurate (p < 0.001) when comparison mammograms (obtained 1 or 2 years previously) were available. Although sensitivity was not significantly affected between the availability of mammograms from 1 or 2 years earlier (p > 0.10), the specificity was. Specificity using mammograms from the latest examination (obtained 1 year previously) as a reference was significantly better (p = 0.03) than specificity using mammograms obtained 2 years previously. CONCLUSION: Comparison mammograms are important for accurate diagnosis-in particular, for increasing specificity. The latest prior examination seems to be the optimal one for this purpose.