Publications

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In recent years, there has been a large-scale dissemination of guidelines in radiology in the form of Reporting & Data Systems (RADS). The use of iodinated contrast media (ICM) has a fundamental role in enhancing the diagnostic capabilities of computed tomography (CT) but poses certain risks. The scope of the present review is to summarize the current role of ICM only in clinical reporting guidelines for CT that have adopted the "RADS" approach, focusing on three specific questions per each RADS: (I) what is the scope of the scoring system; (II) how is ICM used in the scoring system; (III) what is the impact of ICM enhancement on the scoring.

METHODS: We analyzed the original articles for each of the latest versions of RADS that can be used in CT [PubMed articles between January, 2005 and March, 2023 in English and American College of Radiology (ACR) official website].

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: We found 14 RADS suitable for use in CT out of 28 RADS described in the literature. Four RADS were validated by the ACR: Colonography-RADS (C-RADS), Liver Imaging-RADS (LI-RADS), Lung CT Screening-RADS (Lung-RADS), and Neck Imaging-RADS (NI-RADS). One RADS was validated by the ACR in collaboration with other cardiovascular scientific societies: Coronary Artery Disease-RADS 2.0 (CAD-RADS). Nine RADS were proposed by other scientific groups: Bone Tumor Imaging-RADS (BTI-RADS), Bone‑RADS, Coronary Artery Calcium Data & Reporting System (CAC-DRS), Coronavirus Disease 2019 Imaging-RADS (COVID-RADS), COVID-19-RADS (CO-RADS), Interstitial Lung Fibrosis Imaging-RADS (ILF-RADS), Lung-RADS (LU-RADS), Node-RADS, and Viral Pneumonia Imaging-RADS (VP-RADS).

CONCLUSIONS: This overview suggests that ICM is not strictly necessary for the study of bones and calcifications (CAC-DRS, BTI-RADS, Bone-RADS), lung parenchyma (Lung-RADS, LU-RADS, COVID-RADS, CO-RADS, VP-RADS and ILF-RADS), and in CT colonography (C-RADS). On the other hand, ICM plays a key role in CT angiography (CAD-RADS), in the study of liver parenchyma (LI-RADS), and in the evaluation of soft tissues and lymph nodes (NI-RADS, Node-RADS). Future studies are needed in order to evaluate the impact of the new iodinated and non-iodinate contrast media, artificial intelligence tools and dual energy CT in the assignment of RADS scores.

Adnexal masses during pregnancy are a relatively uncommon entity. Their clinical management is challenging given the overlapping features of certain entities on imaging and histopathology, which can mimic malignancy, and the potential side effects to the mother and fetus, whether expectant management versus surgery is pursued. Ultrasonography with Doppler evaluation is the modality of choice for evaluating adnexal masses during pregnancy. Magnetic resonance imaging is the second-line modality useful when US findings are inconclusive/indeterminate. Most adnexal masses in pregnant patients are benign in origin (e.g., functional cysts, mature cystic teratoma, decidualization of endometrioma), but a few are malignant in origin (e.g., dysgerminoma, granulosa cell tumor). Most cases of adnexal masses are asymptomatic, but complications such as ovarian torsion can occur. This review aims to familiarize the radiologist with the imaging of adnexal lesions during pregnancy so that the radiologist can identify ovarian cancer. Specifically, the review will detail the most common benign and malignant adnexal masses in pregnancy, mimickers, and their corresponding imaging findings on US and MRI.

Cervical cancer is the second most encountered cancer in pregnant patients. The 2018 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system for cervical cancer updated the staging of primary cervical carcinoma and disease process, with formal incorporation of imaging as a vital source of information in the management process to improve accuracy. Diagnosis and treatment of the pregnant population is a complex interplay of achieving adequate diagnostic information and optimal treatment while minimizing toxicity and risks to the mother and fetus. While novel imaging techniques and anticancer therapies are rapidly developed, much information on the safety and feasibility of different therapies is not yet available in the pregnant population. Therefore, managing pregnant patients with cervical cancer is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach.

Imaging plays an important role in characterizing and risk-stratifying commonly encountered adnexal lesions. Recently, the American College of Radiology (ACR) released the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) for ultrasound and subsequently for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The goal of the recently developed ACR O-RADS MRI risk stratification system is to improve the quality of imaging reports as well as the reproducibility of evaluating adnexal lesions on MRI. This review focuses on exploring this new system and its future refinements.

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), which includes chemotherapy and radiation prior to surgical resection, has been recently accepted as the new standard of care for patients with locally advanced low and mid rectal cancers. Multiple clinical trials have evaluated this approach in the last several decades and demonstrated improvement in, local control and reduced risk of recurrence. In addition, in the course of these investigations, it has been shown that between a third and a half of patients experience a clinical complete response (cCR) after being treated with the TNT approach, leading to the development of new organ preservation protocol, now known as watch-and-wait (W&W). On this protocol, cCR patients are not referred for surgery after total neoadjuvant treatment. Instead, they remain on close surveillance and, thus, avoid potential complications associated with surgical resection. Multiple clinical trials are ongoing, investigating the long-term outcomes of these new approaches and the development of less toxic and more effective TNT regimens for LARC. Improvements in technology and rectal MRI protocols position radiologists as vital members of multidisciplinary rectal cancer management teams. Rectal MRI has become a critical tool for rectal cancer initial staging, treatment response assessment, and surveillance on W&W protocols. In this review, we summarize the findings of the pivotal clinical trials that contributed to establishing the current treatment paradigms in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) management, with the intention of helping radiologists play more effective roles in their multidisciplinary teams.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this consensus article was to develop guidelines by a focused panel of experts to elaborate a lexicon of image interpretation, and a standardized region-based reporting of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Evidence-based data and expert opinion were combined using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method to attain consensus guidelines. Experts scoring of pelvic compartment delineation and reporting template were collected; responses were analyzed and classified as "RECOMMENDED" versus "NOT RECOMMENDED" (when ≥ 80% consensus among experts) or uncertain (when < 80% consensus among experts).

RESULTS: Consensus regarding pelvic compartment delineation and DIE reporting was attained using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. The pelvis was divided in nine compartments and extrapelvic lesions were assigned to an additional (tenth) compartment. A consensus was also reached for each structure attributed to a compartment and each reporting template item among the experts. No consensus was reached for a normal aspect of uterosacral ligament, but a consensus was reached for an unequivocal involvement leading to a positive diagnosis and an equivocal involvement leading to uncertain diagnosis. Tailored MRI lexicon and standardized region-based report were proposed.

CONCLUSION: These consensus recommendations should be used as a guide for DIE reporting and staging with MRI. Standardized MRI compartment-based structured reporting is recommended to enable consistent accuracy and help select the best therapeutic approach.

PURPOSE: To develop guidelines by international experts to standardize data acquisition, image interpretation, and reporting in rectal cancer restaging with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Evidence-based data and experts' opinions were combined using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method to attain consensus guidelines. Experts provided recommendations for reporting template and protocol for data acquisition were collected; responses were analysed and classified as "RECOMMENDED" versus "NOT RECOMMENDED" (if ≥ 80% consensus among experts) or uncertain (if < 80% consensus among experts).

RESULTS: Consensus regarding patient preparation, MRI sequences, staging and reporting was attained using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. A consensus was reached for each reporting template item among the experts. Tailored MRI protocol and standardized report were proposed.

CONCLUSION: These consensus recommendations should be used as a guide for rectal cancer restaging with MRI.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with adherence to radiology follow-up recommendations by the referring physicians.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, CT, ultrasound, and MRI reports with the keyword "recommend" and synonyms between March 11, 2019, and March 29, 2019, were included. Emergency department and inpatient examinations and routine surveillance recommendations, such as lung nodules, were excluded. Performance of follow-up examinations was correlated with the strength of recommendation, conditionality of recommendation, direct communication of results to ordering provider, and history of cancer. Outcomes included adherence to recommendations and time to follow-up. Statistical comparison between groups was performed using χ2, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman correlation.

RESULTS: Qualifying recommendations were provided in 255 reports (age 60.1 ± 16.5 years, female: 151 of 255, 59.22%). Imaging follow-up was performed in 166 of 255 (65%) reports: 148 of 166 (89.15%) nonconditional versus 18 of 166 (10.48%) conditional recommendations (P = .008), and more frequently in the patients with a strong follow-up recommendation (138 of 166 [83.13%], versus 28 of 166 [16.86%]) (P = .009). The median time to follow-up was 28 days versus 82 days in patients without versus with a history of cancer (P = .00057), 28 days versus 70 days with direct communication with the provider versus without (P = .0069), 82.5 versus 21 days for reports in which a specific follow-up interval was provided (86 of 255, 33.72%) versus those without (169 of 255, 66.27%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSION: The adherence rate for radiological nonroutine recommendations was 65%. Reports with strongly worded and nonconditional follow-up recommendations were followed more frequently. Direct communication with providers, patients without a known cancer history, and recommendations with no specified time interval identified were followed up earlier.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Strongly worded and nonconditional follow-up recommendations increase the likelihood of follow-up being performed. Direct communication of imaging follow-up recommendations to the provider and lack of specific time intervals decreases the median time to follow-up, which in turn may decrease the delay in medical care.

Expert representatives from 11 professional societies, as part of an autonomous work group, researched and developed appropriate use criteria (AUC) for lymphoscintigraphy in sentinel lymph node mapping and lymphedema. The complete findings and discussions of the work group, including example clinical scenarios, were published on October 8, 2022, and are available at https://www.snmmi.org/ClinicalPractice/content.aspx?ItemNumber=42021 The complete AUC document includes clinical scenarios for scintigraphy in patients with breast, cutaneous, and other cancers, as well as for mapping lymphatic flow in lymphedema. Pediatric considerations are addressed. These AUC are intended to assist health care practitioners considering lymphoscintigraphy. Presented here is a brief overview of the AUC, including the rationale and methodology behind development of the document. For detailed findings of the work group, the reader should refer to the complete AUC document online.