Search

Objectives: To compare Gd-EOB-DTPA dynamic hepatocyte-specific contrast-enhanced MRI (DHCE-MRI) with 99mTc-mebrofenin hepatobiliary scintigraphy (HBS) as quantitative liver function tests for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing liver resection.Methods: Patients undergoing liver surgery and preoperative assessment of future remnant liver (FRL) function using 99mTc-mebrofenin HBS were included. Patients underwent DHCE-MRI. Total liver uptake function was calculated for both modalities: mebrofenin uptake rate (MUR) and Ki respectively. The FRL was delineated with both SPECT-CT and MRI to calculate the functional share. Blood samples were taken to assess biochemical liver parameters.Results: A total of 20 patients were included. The HBS-derived MUR and the DHCE-MRI-derived mean Ki correlated strongly for both total and FRL function (Pearson r = 0.70, p = 0.001 and r = 0.89, p < 0.001 respectively). There was a strong agreement between the functional share determined with both modalities (ICC = 0.944, 95% CI 0.863-0.978, n = 20). There was a significant negative correlation between liver aminotransferases and bilirubin for both MUR and Ki.Conclusions: Assessment of liver function with DHCE-MRI is comparable with that of 99mTc-mebrofenin HBS and has the potential to be combined with diagnostic MRI imaging. This can therefore provide a one-stop-shop modality for the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing liver surgery.Key Points: • Quantitative assessment of liver function using hepatobiliary scintigraphy is performed in the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing liver surgery in order to prevent posthepatectomy liver failure. • Gd-EOB-DTPA dynamic hepatocyte-specific contrast-enhanced MRI (DHCE-MRI) is an emerging method to quantify liver function and can serve as a potential alternative to hepatobiliary scintigraphy. • Assessment of liver function with dynamic gadoxetate-enhanced MRI is comparable with that of hepatobiliary scintigraphy and has the potential to be combined with diagnostic MRI imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Computed tomography (CT) colonography cost assumptions so far ranged from €346 to €594 per procedure, based on clinical CT reimbursement rates. The aim of our study was to estimate the costs in a screening situation. Methods: Data were collected within an invitational population-based CRC screening trial ( n = 2,920, age 50-75 years) with a dedicated CT-screening setting. Unit costs were calculated per action, per invitee and per participant (depending on adherence) and per individual with detected advanced neoplasia. Sensitivity analyses were performed, and alternative scenarios were considered. Results: Of the invitees, 47.2 % were reminded, 38.8 % scheduled for an intake, 37.2 % scheduled for CT colonography, 33.6 % underwent CT colonography and 1.1 % needed a re-examination. Lesions ≥10 mm were detected in 2.9 % of the invitees. Invitation costs were €5.57. Costs per CT colonography (intake to results) were €144.00. Extra costs of communication of positive results were €9.00. Average costs of invitational-based CT colonography screening were €56.97 per invitee, €169.40 per participant and €2,772.51 per individual with detected advanced neoplasia. Conclusions: Dutch costs of CT-screening were substantially lower than the cost assumptions that were used in published cost-effectiveness analyses on CT colonography screening. This finding indicates that previous cost-effectiveness analyses should be updated, at least for the Dutch situation. Key Points: • CT colonography screening costs have historically been based on (local) clinical reimbursement rates • Estimates ranged from €346-€594, based on abdominal and/or pelvic computed tomography • Average costs per participant within an invitational population-based screening program: €169.40 • Average CT colonography costs per individual with detected advanced neoplasia: €2,772.51 • Previous cost-effectiveness analyses should probably be updated [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Radiographers have been shown to be capable CT colonography observers. We evaluated whether radiographers can be trained to triage screening CT colonography for extracolonic findings.Methods: Eight radiographers participated in a structured training program. They subsequently evaluated extracolonic findings in 280 low-dose CT colonograms (cases). This dataset contained 66 cases with possibly important findings (E3) and 27 cases with probably important findings (E4) [classification based on the highest classified finding (C-RADS)]. The first 40 and last 40 CT colonograms were identical test cases. Immediate feedback was given after each reading, except for test cases. Radiographers triaged cases based on C-RADS classification and indicated the need for a radiologist read. We constructed learning curves for correct case triaging by calculating moving averages.Results: In the final test series, 84/120 (70 %) cases with E3 or E4 findings and 139/200 (70 %) without E3 or E4 findings were correctly triaged. Correct identification of cases with E3 findings improved with training from 46/88 (52 %) to 62/88 (70 %) (P < 0.0001) but not for E4 findings [both 22/32 (69 %) P = 1.00].Conclusions: Radiographers improve after training in correctly triaging extracolonic findings at CT colonography but do not reach a high enough accuracy to consider their structural involvement in screening.Key Points: Radiographers were trained to triage CT colonography for extracolonic findings. After training, radiographers improved sensitivity for likely unimportant findings. After training, radiographers did not improve sensitivity for possibly important findings. Radiographers should probably not be expected to identify all extracolonic findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Previous meta-analyses on CT-colonography included both average and high risk individuals, which may overestimate the diagnostic value in screening. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain the value of CT-colonography for screening.Methods: A search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Article selection and critical appraisal was done by two reviewers.Inclusion Criteria: prospective, randomized trials or cohort studies comparing CT-colonography with colonoscopy (≥50 participants), ≥95% average risk participants ≥50 years. Study characteristics and 2 × 2 contingency Tables were recorded. Sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated per patient and per polyp (≥6 mm, ≥10 mm), using univariate and bivariate analyses.Results: Five of 1,021 studies identified were included, including 4,086 participants (<1% high risk). I(2)-values showed substantial heterogeneity, especially for 6-9 mm polyps and adenomas: 68.1% vs. 78.6% (sensitivity per patient). Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 6 mm were 75.9% and 82.9%, corresponding specificities 94.6% and 91.4%. Estimated sensitivities for patients with polyps or adenomas ≥ 10 mm were 83.3% and 87.9%, corresponding specificities 98.7% and 97.6%. Estimated sensitivities per polyp for advanced adenomas ≥ 6 mm and ≥ 10 mm were 83.9% and 83.8%.Conclusion: Compared to colonoscopy, CT-colonography has a high sensitivity for adenomas ≥ 10 mm. For (advanced) adenomas ≥ 6 mm sensitivity is somewhat lower. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Head-to-head comparison of ultrasound and CT accuracy in common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain.Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients with abdominal pain for >2 h and <5 days referred for imaging underwent both US and CT by different radiologists/radiological residents. An expert panel assigned a final diagnosis. Ultrasound and CT sensitivity and predictive values were calculated for frequent final diagnoses. Effect of patient characteristics and observer experience on ultrasound sensitivity was studied.Results: Frequent final diagnoses in the 1,021 patients (mean age 47; 55% female) were appendicitis (284; 28%), diverticulitis (118; 12%) and cholecystitis (52; 5%). The sensitivity of CT in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was significantly higher than that of ultrasound: 94% versus 76% (p < 0.01) and 81% versus 61% (p = 0.048), respectively. For cholecystitis, the sensitivity of both was 73% (p = 1.00). Positive predictive values did not differ significantly between ultrasound and CT for these conditions. Ultrasound sensitivity in detecting appendicitis and diverticulitis was not significantly negatively affected by patient characteristics or reader experience.Conclusion: CT misses fewer cases than ultrasound, but both ultrasound and CT can reliably detect common diagnoses causing acute abdominal pain. Ultrasound sensitivity was largely not influenced by patient characteristics and reader experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To meta-analyse the diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis.Methods: From a comprehensive literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane (up to November 2009), articles were selected that investigated the diagnostic performance imaging techniques for evaluating hepatic steatosis with histopathology as the reference standard. Cut-off values for the presence of steatosis on liver biopsy were subdivided into four groups: (1) >0, >2 and >5% steatosis; (2) >10, >15 and >20%; (3) >25, >30 and >33%; (4) >50, >60 and >66%. Per group, summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The natural-logarithm of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) was used as a single indicator of test performance.Results: 46 articles were included. Mean sensitivity estimates for subgroups were 73.3-90.5% (US), 46.1-72.0% (CT), 82.0-97.4% (MRI) and 72.7-88.5% (1H-MRS). Mean specificity ranges were 69.6-85.2% (US), 88.1-94.6% (CT), 76.1-95.3% (MRI) and 92.0-95.7% (1H-MRS). Overall performance (lnDOR) of MRI and 1H-MRS was better than that for US and CT for all subgroups, with significant differences in groups 1 and 2.Conclusion: MRI and 1H-MRS can be considered techniques of choice for accurate evaluation of hepatic steatosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the variability and systematic differences in polyp measurements on optical colonoscopy and CT colonography.Materials: Gastroenterologists measured 51 polyps by visual estimation, forceps comparison and linear probe. CT colonography observers randomly assessed polyp size two-dimensionally (abdominal and intermediate window) and three-dimensionally (manually and semi-automatically). Linear mixed models were used to assess the variability and systematic differences between CT colonography and optical colonoscopy techniques.Results: The variability of forceps and linear probe measurements was comparable and both showed less variability than measurement by visual assessment. Measurements by linear probe were 0.7 mm smaller than measurements by visual assessment or by forceps. The variability of all CT colonography techniques was lower than for measurements by forceps or visual assessment and sometimes lower (only 2D intermediate window and manual 3D) compared with measurements by linear probe. All CT colonography measurements judged polyps to be larger than optical colonoscopy, with differences ranging from 0.7 to 2.3 mm.Conclusion: A linear probe does not reduce the measurement variability of endoscopists compared with the forceps. Measurement differences between observers on CT colonography were usually smaller than at optical colonoscopy. Polyps appeared larger when using various CT colonography techniques than when measured during optical colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of MR-colonography for the detection of colorectal lesions.Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed for comparative MR-colonography studies, published between May 1997 and February 2009, using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. We included studies if MR-colonography findings were prospectively compared with conventional colonoscopy in (a)symptomatic patients. Two reviewers independently extracted study design characteristics and data for summarising sensitivity and specificity. Heterogeneity in findings between studies was tested using I (2) test statistics. Sensitivity and specificity estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated on per patient basis and summary sensitivity on per polyp basis, using bivariate and univariate statistical models.Results: Thirty-seven studies were found to be potentially relevant and 13 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The study population comprised 1,285 patients with a mean disease prevalence of 44% (range 22-63%). Sensitivity for the detection of CRC was 100%. Significant heterogeneity was found for overall per patient sensitivity and specificity. For polyps with a size of 10 mm or larger, per patient sensitivity and specificity estimates were 88% (95% CI 63-97%; I (2) = 37%) and 99% (95% CI 95-100%; I (2) = 60%). On a per polyp basis, polyps of 10 mm or larger were detected with a sensitivity of 84% (95% CI 66-94%; I (2) = 51%). The data were too heterogeneous for polyps smaller than 6 mm and 6-9 mm.Conclusion: MR-colonography can accurately detect colorectal polyps more than 10 mm in size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to prospectively compare participant experience and preference of limited preparation computed tomography colonography (CTC) with full-preparation colonoscopy in a consecutive series of patients at increased risk of colorectal cancer. CTC preparation comprised 180 ml diatrizoate meglumine, 80 ml barium and 30 mg bisacodyl. For the colonoscopy preparation 4 l of polyethylene glycol solution was used. Participants' experience and preference were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the chi-squared test, respectively. Associations between preference and experience parameters for the 173 participants were determined by logistic regression. Diarrhoea occurred in 94% of participants during CTC preparation. This side effect was perceived as severely or extremely burdensome by 29%. Nonetheless, the total burden was significantly lower for the CTC preparation than for colonoscopy (9% rated the CTC preparation as severely or extremely burdensome compared with 59% for colonoscopy; p < 0.001). Participants experienced significantly more pain, discomfort and total burden with the colonoscopy procedure than with CTC (p < 0.001). After 5 weeks, 69% preferred CTC, 8% were indifferent and 23% preferred colonoscopy (p < 0.001). A burdensome colonoscopy preparation and pain at colonoscopy were associated with CTC preference (p < 0.04). In conclusion, participants' experience and preference were rated in favour of CTC with limited bowel preparation compared with full-preparation colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to compare a primary uncleansed 2D and a primary electronically cleansed 3D reading strategy in CTC in limited prepped patients. Seventy-two patients received a low-fibre diet with oral iodine before CT-colonography. Six novices and two experienced observers reviewed both cleansed and uncleansed examinations in randomized order. Mean per-polyp sensitivity was compared between the methods by using generalized estimating equations. Mean per-patient sensitivity, and specificity were compared using the McNemar test. Results were stratified for experience (experienced observers versus novice observers). Mean per-polyp sensitivity for polyps 6 mm or larger was significantly higher for novices using cleansed 3D (65%; 95%CI 57-73%) compared with uncleansed 2D (51%; 95%CI 44-59%). For experienced observers there was no significant difference. Mean per-patient sensitivity for polyps 6 mm or larger was significantly higher for novices as well: respectively 75% (95%CI 70-80%) versus 64% (95%CI 59-70%). For experienced observers there was no statistically significant difference. Specificity for both novices and experienced observers was not significantly different. For novices primary electronically cleansed 3D is better for polyp detection than primary uncleansed 2D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to investigate if experienced readers differ when matching polyps shown by both CT colonography (CTC) and optical colonoscopy (OC) and to explore the reasons for discrepancy. Twenty-eight CTC cases with corresponding OC were presented to eight experienced CTC readers. Cases represented a broad spectrum of findings, not completely fulfilling typical matching criteria. In 21 cases there was a single polyp on CTC and OC; in seven there were multiple polyps. Agreement between readers for matching was analyzed. For the 21 single-polyp cases, the number of correct matches per reader varied from 13 to 19. Almost complete agreement between readers was observed in 15 cases (71%), but substantial discrepancy was found for the remaining six (29%) probably due to large perceived differences in polyp size between CT and OC. Readers were able to match between 27 (71%) and 35 (92%) of the 38 CTC detected polyps in the seven cases with multiple polyps. Experienced CTC readers agree to a considerable extent when matching polyps between CTC and subsequent OC, but non-negligible disagreement exists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The level of inter-observer agreement of abdominal computed tomography (CT) in unselected patients presenting with acute abdominal pain at the Emergency Department (ED) was evaluated. Two hundred consecutive patients with acute abdominal pain were prospectively included. Multi-slice CT was performed in all patients with intravenous contrast medium only. Three radiologists independently read all CT examinations. They recorded specific radiological features and a final diagnosis on a case record form. We calculated the proportion of agreement and kappa values, for overall, urgent and frequently occurring diagnoses. The mean age of the evaluated patients was 46 years (range 19-94), of which 54% were women. Overall agreement on diagnoses was good, with a median kappa of 0.66. Kappa values for specific urgent diagnoses were excellent, with median kappa values of 0.84, 0.90 and 0.81, for appendicitis, diverticulitis and bowel obstruction, respectively. Abdominal CT has good inter-observer agreement in unselected patients with acute abdominal pain at the ED, with excellent agreement for specific urgent diagnoses as diverticulitis and appendicitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To systematically review the evidence on the accuracy of MRI for grading disease activity in Crohn's disease (CD). The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched for studies on the accuracy of MRI in grading CD compared to a predefined reference standard. Two independent observers scored all relevant data. Three disease stages were defined: remission, mild and frank disease. The accuracy rates of MRI per disease stage were calculated by means of a random-effects model. Seven studies were included from a search resulting in 253 articles. In total 140 patients (16 patients in remission, 29 with mild disease and 95 with frank disease) were used for data analysis. MRI correctly graded 91% (95% CI: 84-96%) of patients with frank disease, 62% (95% CI: 44-79) of patients with mild disease and 62% (95% CI: 38-84) of patients in remission. MRI more often overstaged than understaged disease activity; MRI overstaged disease activity in 38% of patients in remission, mostly as mild disease. Overstaging of mild disease was observed in 21%, understaging in 17%. MRI correctly grades disease activity in a large proportion of patients with frank disease. For patients in remission or with mild disease, MRI correctly stages disease activity in many patients (62%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We prospectively determined whether computer-aided detection (CAD) could improve the performance characteristics of computed tomography colonography (CTC) in a population of increased risk for colorectal cancer. Therefore, we included 170 consecutive patients that underwent both CTC and colonoscopy. All findings >or=6 mm were evaluated at colonoscopy by segmental unblinding. We determined per-patient sensitivity and specificity for polyps >or=6 mm and >or=10 mm without and with computer-aided detection (CAD). The McNemar test was used for comparison the results without and with CAD. Unblinded colonoscopy detected 50 patients with lesions >or=6 mm and 25 patients with lesions >or=10 mm. Sensitivity of CTC without CAD for these size categories was 80% (40/50, 95% CI: 69-81%) and 64% (16/25, 95% CI: 45-83%), respectively. CTC with CAD detected one additional patient with a lesion >or=6 mm and two with a lesion >or=10 mm, resulting in a sensitivity of 82% (41/50, 95% CI: 71-93%) (p = 0.50) and 72% (18/25, 95% CI: 54-90%) (p = 1.0), respectively. Specificity without CAD for polyps >or=6 mm and >or=10 mm was 84% (101/120, 95% CI: 78-91%) and 94% (136/145, 95% CI: 90-98%), respectively. With CAD, the specificity remained (nearly) unchanged: 83% (99/120, 95% CI: 76-89%) and 94% (136/145, 95% CI: 90-98%), respectively. Thus, although CTC with CAD detected a few more patients than CTC without CAD, it had no statistically significant positive influence on CTC performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fluoro-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including unenhanced single-shot spin-echo echo planar imaging (SS SE-EPI) and small paramagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) enhancement, were compared prospectively for detecting colorectal liver metastases. Twenty-four consecutive patients suspected for metastases underwent MRI and FDG-PET/CT. Fourteen patients (58%) had previously received chemotherapy, including seven patients whose chemotherapy was still continuing to within 1 month of the PET/CT study. The mean interval between PET/CT and MRI was 10.2+/-5.2 days. Histopathology (n=18) or follow-up imaging (n=6) were used as reference. Seventy-seven metastases were detected. In nine patients, MRI and PET/CT gave concordant results. Sensitivities for unenhanced SS SE-EPI, MRI without SS SE-EPI and FDG-PET/CT were, respectively, 100% (p=9 x 10(-10) vs PET, p=8 x 10(-3) vs MRI without SS SE-EPI), 90% (p=2 x 10(-7) vs PET) and 60%. PET/CT sensitivity dropped significantly with decreasing size, from 100% in lesions larger than 20 mm (identical to MRI), over 54% in lesions between 10 and 20 mm (p=3 x 10(5) versus unenhanced SS SE-EPI), to 32% in lesions under 10 mm (p=6 x 10(-5) versus unenhanced SS SE-EPI). Positive predictive value of PET was 100% (identical to MRI). MRI, particularly unenhanced SS SE-EPI, has good sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Its sensitivity is better than that of FDG-PET/CT, especially for small lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of graded compression ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing acute colonic diverticulitis (ACD) in suspected patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of CT and US in diagnosing ACD. Study quality was assessed with the QUADAS tool. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random effects model. Six US studies evaluated 630 patients, and eight CT studies evaluated 684 patients. Overall, their quality was moderate. We did not identify meaningful sources of heterogeneity in the study results. Summary sensitivity estimates were 92% (95% CI: 80%-97%) for US versus 94% (95%CI: 87%-97%) for CT (p = 0.65). Summary specificity estimates were 90% (95%CI: 82%-95%) for US versus 99% (95%CI: 90%-100%) for CT (p = 0.07). For the identification of alternative diseases sensitivity ranged between 33% and 78% for US and between 50% and 100% for CT. The currently best available evidence shows no statistically significant difference in accuracy of US and CT in diagnosing ACD. Therefore, both US and CT can be used as initial diagnostic tool until new evidence is brought forward. However, CT is more likely to identify alternative diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the frequency and spectrum of lesions of different pelvic floor muscles at endoanal MRI in women with severe faecal incontinence and to study their relation with incontinence severity and manometric findings. In 105 women MRI examinations were evaluated for internal anal sphincter (IAS), external anal sphincter (EAS), puborectal muscle (PM) and levator ani (LA) lesions. The relative contribution of lesions to differences in incontinence severity and manometric findings was studied. IAS (n = 59) and EAS (n = 61) defects were more common than PM (n = 23) and LA (n = 26) defects. PM and LA defects presented mainly with IAS and/or EAS defects (isolated n = 2 and n = 3). EAS atrophy (n = 73) was more common than IAS (n = 19), PM (n = 16) and LA (n = 9) atrophy and presented mainly isolated. PM and LA atrophy presented primarily with EAS atrophy (isolated n = 3 and n = 1). Patients with IAS and EAS lesions had a lower resting and squeeze pressure, respectively; no other associations were found. PM and LA lesions are relatively common in patients with severe faecal incontinence, but the majority of lesions are found in women who also have IAS and/or EAS lesions. Only an association between anal sphincter lesions and manometry was observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is an increasing need for objective treatment monitoring in perianal fistulising Crohn's disease (pfCD). Therefore, the magnetic resonance novel index for fistula imaging in CD (MAGNIFI-CD) index has been designed and internally validated on the ADMIRE-CD trial cohort. The aim of this study was to externally validate the MAGNIFI-CD index to monitor response to medical and surgical treatment regimens in pfCD., Methods: A retrospective longitudinal cohort was established of consecutive patients with complex pfCD treated with surgical and/or medical therapy and a baseline and follow-up MRI between January 2007 and May 2021. The MAGNIFI-CD index was scored by two independent, abdominal radiologists blinded for time points and clinical outcomes. Responsiveness, reliability, and test accuracy regarding clinically important improvement were assessed. Cut-offs for response and remission were selected classified on fistula drainage assessment and physician global assessment., Results: A total of 65 patients (51% female, median age 32 years) were included. A clinically relevant responsiveness of the MAGNIFI-CD was shown, with a significant decrease in clinical remitters and responders with a median MAGNIFI-CD of 18.0 [7.5-20.0] to 9.0 [0.8-16.0] (p < 0.001) and non-significant change in non-responders with a median MAGNIFI-CD of 20.0 [12.0-23.0] to 18.0 [13.0-21.0] (p = 0.22). There was an 'almost perfect' interobserver agreement (ICC = 0.87; 95% CI 0.80-0.92) for the MAGNIFI-CD index. An optimal cut-off value was defined as a decrease of 2 points for clinical response, and a MAGNIFI-CD ≤ 6 for remission at follow-up MRI., Conclusion: The MAGNIFI-CD index is a responsive and reliable MRI scoring instrument for treatment monitoring in perianal fistulising Crohn's disease., Clinical Relevance Statement: The MAGNIFI-CD index is a well-structured, responsive scoring instrument to assess fistula severity and activity that allows quantitative detection of changes in therapy response in patients with perianal fistulising Crohn's disease, thereby facilitating endpoints in clinical trials., Key Points: Well-defined cut-offs for response and remission are needed for objective treatment monitoring of perianal fistulising Crohn's disease (pfCD). Cut-off values for remission and for response at 6 months follow-up were defined. Interobserver agreement was good. The MAGNIFI-CD index is responsive and reliable for treatment monitoring and is suitable for use in clinical trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The yield of pulmonary imaging in patients with suspected infection but no respiratory symptoms or signs is probably limited, ultra-low-dose CT (ULDCT) is known to have a higher sensitivity than Chest X-ray (CXR). Our objective was to describe the yield of ULDCT and CXR in patients clinically suspected of infection, but without respiratory symptoms or signs, and to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ULDCT and CXR., Methods: In the OPTIMACT trial, patients suspected of non-traumatic pulmonary disease at the emergency department (ED) were randomly allocated to undergo CXR (1210 patients) or ULDCT (1208 patients). We identified 227 patients in the study group with fever, hypothermia, and/or elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) but no respiratory symptoms or signs, and estimated ULDCT and CXR sensitivity and specificity in detecting pneumonia. The final day-28 diagnosis served as the clinical reference standard., Results: In the ULDCT group, 14/116 (12%) received a final diagnosis of pneumonia, versus 8/111 (7%) in the CXR group. ULDCT sensitivity was significantly higher than that of CXR: 13/14 (93%) versus 4/8 (50%), a difference of 43% (95% CI: 6 to 80%). ULDCT specificity was 91/102 (89%) versus 97/103 (94%) for CXR, a difference of - 5% (95% CI: - 12 to 3%). PPV was 54% (13/24) for ULDCT versus 40% (4/10) for CXR, NPV 99% (91/92) versus 96% (97/101)., Conclusion: Pneumonia can be present in ED patients without respiratory symptoms or signs who have a fever, hypothermia, and/or elevated CRP. ULDCT's sensitivity is a significant advantage over CXR when pneumonia has to be excluded., Clinical Relevance Statement: Pulmonary imaging in patients with suspected infection but no respiratory symptoms or signs can result in the detection of clinically significant pneumonia. The increased sensitivity of ultra-low-dose chest CT compared to CXR is of added value in vulnerable and immunocompromised patients., Key Points: • Clinical significant pneumonia does occur in patients who have a fever, low core body temperature, or elevated CRP without respiratory symptoms or signs. • Pulmonary imaging should be considered in patients with unexplained symptoms or signs of infections. • To exclude pneumonia in this patient group, ULDCT's improved sensitivity is a significant advantage over CXR., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is performed routinely in the work-up for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and could potentially replace invasive coronary angiography (ICA) to rule out left main (LM) and proximal coronary stenosis. The objectives were to assess the diagnostic yield and accuracy of pre-TAVI CTA to detect LM and proximal coronary stenosis of ≥ 50% and ≥ 70% diameter stenosis (DS)., Methods: The DEPICT CTA database consists of individual patient data from four studies with a retrospective design that analyzed the diagnostic accuracy of pre-TAVI CTA to detect coronary stenosis, as compared with ICA. Pooled data were used to assess diagnostic accuracy to detect coronary stenosis in the left main and the three proximal coronary segments on a per-patient and a per-segment level. We included 1060 patients (mean age: 81.5 years, 42.7% male)., Results: On ICA, the prevalence of proximal stenosis was 29.0% (≥ 50% DS) and 15.7% (≥ 70% DS). Pre-TAVI CTA ruled out ≥ 50% DS in 51.6% of patients with a sensitivity of 96.4%, specificity of 71.2%, PPV of 57.7%, and NPV of 98.0%. For ≥ 70% DS, pre-TAVI CTA ruled out stenosis in 70.0% of patients with a sensitivity of 96.7%, specificity of 87.5%, PPV of 66.9%, and NPV of 99.0%., Conclusion: CTA provides high diagnostic accuracy to rule out LM and proximal coronary stenosis in patients undergoing work-up for TAVI. Clinical application of CTA as a gatekeeper for ICA would reduce the need for ICA in 52% or 70% of patients, using a threshold of ≥ 50% or ≥ 70% DS, respectively., Key Points: • Clinical application of CTA as a gatekeeper for ICA would reduce the need for ICA in 52% or 70% of TAVI patients, using a threshold of ≥ 50% or ≥ 70% diameter stenosis. • The diagnostic accuracy of CTA to exclude proximal coronary stenosis in these patients is high, with a sensitivity of 96.4% and NPV of 98.0% for a threshold of ≥ 50%, and a sensitivity of 96.7% and NPV of 99.0% for a threshold of ≥ 70% diameter stenosis. • Atrial fibrillation and heart rate did not significantly affect sensitivity and NPV. However, a heart rate of < 70 b/min during CTA was associated with a significantly improved specificity and PPV., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Main Recommendations: 1. ESGE/ESGAR recommend computed tomographic colonography (CTC) as the radiological examination of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend barium enema in this setting. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.2. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC, preferably the same or next day, if colonoscopy is incomplete. The timing depends on an interdisciplinary decision including endoscopic and radiological factors. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR suggests that, in centers with expertise in and availability of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE), CCE preferably the same or the next day may be considered if colonoscopy is incomplete. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.3. When colonoscopy is contraindicated or not possible, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable and equally sensitive alternative for patients with alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. Because of lack of direct evidence, ESGE/ESGAR do not recommend CCE in this situation. Very low quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an acceptable alternative to colonoscopy for patients with non-alarm symptoms. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. In centers with availability, ESGE/ESGAR suggests that CCE may be considered in patients with non-alarm symptoms. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.4. Where there is no organized fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based population colorectal screening program, ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC as an option for colorectal cancer screening, providing the screenee is adequately informed about test characteristics, benefits, and risks, and depending on local service- and patient-related factors. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR do not suggest CCE as a first-line screening test for colorectal cancer. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.5. ESGE/ESGAR recommend CTC in the case of a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or FIT with incomplete or unfeasible colonoscopy, within organized population screening programs. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. ESGE/ESGAR also suggest the use of CCE in this setting based on availability. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence.6. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC with intravenous contrast medium injection for surveillance after curative-intent resection of colorectal cancer only in patients in whom colonoscopy is contraindicated or unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in this setting. Very low quality evidence.7. ESGE/ESGAR suggest CTC in patients with high risk polyps undergoing surveillance after polypectomy only when colonoscopy is unfeasible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to recommend CCE in post-polypectomy surveillance. Very low quality evidence.8. ESGE/ESGAR recommend against CTC in patients with acute colonic inflammation and in those who have recently undergone colorectal surgery, pending a multidisciplinary evaluation. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.9. ESGE/ESGAR recommend referral for endoscopic polypectomy in patients with at least one polyp ≥6 mm detected at CTC or CCE. Follow-up CTC may be clinically considered for 6-9-mm CTC-detected lesions if patients do not undergo polypectomy because of patient choice, comorbidity, and/or low risk profile for advanced neoplasia. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. Source and scope This is an update of the 2014-15 Guideline of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR). It addresses the clinical indications for the use of imaging alternatives to standard colonoscopy. A targeted literature search was performed to evaluate the evidence supporting the use of computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or colon capsule endoscopy (CCE). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence.

Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) on FibroScan ® in detecting and grading steatosis in a screening setting and perform a head-to-head comparison with conventional B-mode ultrasound., Methods: Sixty children with severe obesity (median BMI z-score 3.37; median age 13.7 years) were evaluated. All underwent CAP and US using a standardized scoring system. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy proton density fat fraction (MRS-PDFF) was used as a reference standard., Results: Steatosis was present in 36/60 (60%) children. The areas under the ROC (AUROC) of CAP for the detection of grade ≥ S1, ≥ S2, and ≥ S3 steatosis were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.67-0.89), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65-0.87), and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88), respectively. The AUROC of US for the detection of grade ≥ S1 steatosis was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.55-0.80) and not significantly different from that of CAP (p = 0.09). For detecting ≥ S1 steatosis, using the optimal cutoffs, CAP (277 dB/m) and US (US steatosis score ≥ 2) had a sensitivity of 75% and 61% and a specificity of 75% and 71%, respectively. When using echogenicity of liver parenchyma as only the scoring item, US had a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 46% to detect ≥ S1 steatosis. The difference in specificity of CAP and US when using only echogenicity of liver parenchyma of 29% was significant (p = 0.04)., Conclusion: The overall performance of CAP is not significantly better than that of US in detecting steatosis in children with obesity, provided that the standardized scoring of US features is applied. When US is based on liver echogenicity only, CAP outperforms US in screening for any steatosis (≥ S1)., Key Points: • The areas under the ROC curves of CAP and ultrasound (US) for detecting grade ≥ S1 steatosis were 0.80 and 0.68, respectively, and were not significantly different (p = 0.09). • For detecting grade ≥ S1 steatosis in severely obese children, CAP had a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 75% at its optimal cutoff value of 277 dB/m. • For detecting grade ≥ S1 steatosis in clinical practice, both CAP and US can be used, provided that the standardized scoring of US images is used.

Objectives: To compare MR imaging with or without DWI and clinical response evaluation (CRE) in the local control evaluation of cervical carcinoma after radiotherapy., Methods: In a multicentre university setting, we prospectively included 107 patients with primary cervical cancer treated with radiotherapy. Sensitivity and specificity for CRE and MR imaging (with pre-therapy MR imaging as reference) (2 readers) were evaluated using cautious and strict criteria for identifying residual tumour. Nested logistic regression models were constructed for CRE, subsequently adding MR imaging with and without DWI as independent variables, as well as the pre- to post-treatment change in apparent diffusion coefficient (delta ADC)., Results: Using cautious criteria, CRE and MR imaging with DWI (reader 1/reader 2) have comparable high specificity (83% and 89%/95%, respectively), whereas MR imaging without DWI showed significantly lower specificity (63%/53%) than CRE. Using strict criteria, CRE and MR imaging with DWI both showed very high specificity (99% and 92%/95%, respectively), whereas MR imaging without DWI showed significantly lower specificity (89%/77%) than CRE. All sensitivities were not significantly different. Addition of MR imaging with DWI to CRE has statistically significant incremental value in identifying residual tumour (reader 1: estimate, 1.06; p = 0.001) (reader 2: estimate, 0.62; p = 0.02). Adding the delta ADC did not have significant incremental value in detecting residual tumour., Conclusions: DWI significantly increases the specificity of MR imaging in the detection of local residual tumour. Furthermore, MR imaging with DWI has significant incremental diagnostic value over CRE, whereas adding the delta ADC has no incremental diagnostic value., Key Points: • If MR imaging is used for response evaluation, DWI should be incorporated • MR imaging with DWI has diagnostic value comparable/complementary to clinical response evaluation • Inter-reader agreement is moderate to fair for two experienced radiologist readers • Quantitative measurements of ADC early post-therapy have limited diagnostic value.

The article Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting, written by [§§§ AuthorNames §§§].

Objectives: To update the 2012 ESGAR consensus guidelines on the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for clinical staging and restaging of rectal cancer., Methods: Fourteen abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) participated in a consensus meeting, organised according to an adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Two independent (non-voting) Chairs facilitated the meeting. 246 items were scored (comprising 229 items from the previous 2012 consensus and 17 additional items) and classified as 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate' (defined by ≥ 80 % consensus) or uncertain (defined by < 80 % consensus)., Results: Consensus was reached for 226 (92 %) of items. From these recommendations regarding hardware, patient preparation, imaging sequences and acquisition, criteria for MR imaging evaluation and reporting structure were constructed. The main additions to the 2012 consensus include recommendations regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging, criteria for nodal staging and a recommended structured report template., Conclusions: These updated expert consensus recommendations should be used as clinical guidelines for primary staging and restaging of rectal cancer using MRI., Key Points: • These guidelines present recommendations for staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • The guidelines were constructed through consensus amongst 14 pelvic imaging experts. • Consensus was reached by the experts for 92 % of the 246 items discussed. • Practical guidelines for nodal staging are proposed. • A structured reporting template is presented.

Objectives: To validate two previously presented models containing risk factors to identify patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 or eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 ., Methods: In random patients undergoing intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) the following risk factors were assessed: history of urological/nephrological disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, anaemia, congestive heart failure, other cardiovascular disease or multiple myeloma or Waldenström disease. Data on kidney function, age, gender and type and indication of CECT were also registered. We studied two models: model A-diabetes mellitus, history of urological/nephrological disease, cardiovascular disease, hypertension; model B-diabetes mellitus, history of urological/nephrological disease, age >75 years and congestive heart failure. For each model, associations with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 or eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 was studied., Results: A total of 1,001 patients, mean age 60.36 years were included. In total, 92 (9.2 %) patients had an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 and 11 (1.1 %) patients an eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 . Model A detected 543 patients: 81 with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 (missing 11) and all 11 with eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 . Model B detected 420 patients: 70 (missing 22) with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 and all 11 with eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 . Associations were significant (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Model B resulted in the lowest superfluous eGFR measurements while detecting all patients with eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m 2 and nearly all with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 ., Key Points: • Less than 10% of patients undergoing contrast-enhanced CT have an eGFR of <60ml/min/1.73m 2 • Four risk factors can be used to detect pre-existent kidney disease • It is safe to reduce eGFR measurements using a four-risk-factor model.

Purpose: We assessed the burden of waiting for surveillance CT colonography (CTC) performed in patients having 6-9 mm colorectal polyps on primary screening CTC. Additionally, we compared the burden of primary and surveillance CTC., Materials and Methods: In an invitational population-based CTC screening trial, 101 persons were diagnosed with <3 polyps 6-9 mm, for which surveillance CTC after 3 years was advised. Validated questionnaires regarding expected and perceived burden (5-point Likert scales) were completed before and after index and surveillance CTC, also including items on burden of waiting for surveillance CTC. McNemar's test was used for comparison after dichotomization., Results: Seventy-eight (77 %) of 101 invitees underwent surveillance CTC, of which 66 (85 %) completed the expected and 62 (79 %) the perceived burden questionnaire. The majority of participants (73 %) reported the experience of waiting for surveillance CTC as 'never' or 'only sometimes' burdensome. There was almost no difference in expected and perceived burden between surveillance and index CTC. Waiting for the results after the procedure was significantly more burdensome for surveillance CTC than for index CTC (23 vs. 8 %; p = 0.012)., Conclusion: Waiting for surveillance CTC after primary CTC screening caused little or no burden for surveillance participants. In general, the burden of surveillance and index CTC were comparable., Key Points: • Waiting for surveillance CTC within a CRC screening caused little burden • The vast majority never or only sometimes thought about their polyp(s) • In general, the burden of index and surveillance CTC were comparable • Awaiting results was more burdensome for surveillance than for index CTC., Competing Interests: Compliance with ethical standards All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Purpose: Surveillance CT colonography (CTC) is a viable option for 6-9 mm polyps at CTC screening for colorectal cancer. We established participation and diagnostic yield of surveillance and determined overall yield of CTC screening., Material and Methods: In an invitational CTC screening trial 82 of 982 participants harboured 6-9 mm polyps as the largest lesion(s) for which surveillance CTC was advised. Only participants with one or more lesion(s) ≥6 mm at surveillance CTC were offered colonoscopy (OC); 13 had undergone preliminary OC. The surveillance CTC yield was defined as the number of participants with advanced neoplasia in the 82 surveillance participants, and was added to the primary screening yield., Results: Sixty-five of 82 participants were eligible for surveillance CTC of which 56 (86.2 %) participated. Advanced neoplasia was diagnosed in 15/56 participants (26.8 %) and 9/13 (69.2 %) with preliminary OC. Total surveillance yield was 24/82 (29.3 %). No carcinomas were detected. Adding surveillance results to initial screening CTC yield significantly increased the advanced neoplasia yield per 100 CTC participants (6.1 to 8.6; p < 0.001) and per 100 invitees (2.1 to 2.9; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Surveillance CTC for 6-9 mm polyps has a substantial yield of advanced adenomas and significantly increased the CTC yield in population screening., Key Points: • The participation rate in surveillance CT colonography (CTC) is 86 %. • Advanced adenoma prevalence in a 6-9 mm CTC surveillance population is high. • Surveillance CTC significantly increases the yield of population screening by CTC. • Surveillance CTC for 6-9 mm polyps is a safe strategy. • Surveillance CTC is unlikely to yield new important extracolonic findings.

Objective: To assess which risk factors can be used to reduce superfluous estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measurements before intravenous contrast medium administration., Methods: In consecutive patients, all decreased eGFR risk factors were assessed: diabetes mellitus (DM), history of urologic/nephrologic disease (HUND), nephrotoxic medication, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, age > 60 years, anaemia, malignancy and multiple myeloma/M. Waldenström. We studied four models: (1) all risk factors, (2) DM, HUND, hypertension, age > 60 years; (3) DM, HUND, cardiovascular disease, hypertension; (4) DM, HUND, age > 75 years and congestive heart failure. For each model, association with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) or eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2) was studied., Results: A total of 998 patients, mean age 59.94 years were included; 112 with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and 30 with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Model 1 detected 816 patients: 108 with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and all 30 with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Model 2 detected 745 patients: 108 with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and all 30 with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Model 3 detected 622 patients: 100 with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and all 30 with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Model 4 detected 440 patients: 86 with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and all 30 with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Associations were significant (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Model 4 is most effective, resulting in the lowest proportion of superfluous eGFR measurements while detecting all patients with eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and most with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)., Key Points: A major risk factor for contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is kidney disease. Risk factors are used to identify patients with pre-existent kidney disease. Evidence for risk factors to identify patients with kidney disease is limited. The number of eGFR measurements to detect kidney disease can be reduced.