How young radiologists use contrast media and manage adverse reactions: an international survey

OBJECTIVES

To collect real-world data about the knowledge and self-perception of young radiologists concerning the use of contrast media (CM) and the management of adverse drug reactions (ADR).

METHODS

A survey (29 questions) was distributed to residents and board-certified radiologists younger than 40 years to investigate the current international situation in young radiology community regarding CM and ADRs. Descriptive statistics analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Out of 454 respondents from 48 countries (mean age: 31.7 ± 4 years, range 25-39), 271 (59.7%) were radiology residents and 183 (40.3%) were board-certified radiologists. The majority (349, 76.5%) felt they were adequately informed regarding the use of CM. However, only 141 (31.1%) received specific training on the use of CM and 82 (18.1%) about management ADR during their residency. Although 266 (58.6%) knew safety protocols for handling ADR, 69.6% (316) lacked confidence in their ability to manage CM-induced ADRs and 95.8% (435) expressed a desire to enhance their understanding of CM use and handling of CM-induced ADRs. Nearly 300 respondents (297; 65.4%) were aware of the benefits of contrast-enhanced ultrasound, but 249 (54.8%) of participants did not perform it. The preferred CM injection strategy in CT parenchymal examination and CT angiography examination was based on patient's lean body weight in 318 (70.0%) and 160 (35.2%), a predeterminate fixed amount in 79 (17.4%) and 116 (25.6%), iodine delivery rate in 26 (5.7%) and 122 (26.9%), and scan time in 31 (6.8%) and 56 (12.3%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Training in CM use and management ADR should be implemented in the training of radiology residents.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

We highlight the need for improvement in the education of young radiologists regarding contrast media; more attention from residency programs and scientific societies should be focused on training about contrast media use and the management of adverse drug reactions.

KEY POINTS

• This survey investigated training of young radiologists about use of contrast media and management adverse reactions. • Most young radiologists claimed they did not receive dedicated training. • An extreme heterogeneity of responses was observed about contrast media indications/contraindications and injection strategy.

Multi-sequence MRI radiomics of colorectal liver metastases: Which features are reproducible across readers?

PURPOSE

To assess the inter-reader reproducibility of radiomics features on multiple MRI sequences after segmentations of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHOD

30 CRLM (in 23 patients) were manually delineated by three readers on MRI before the start of chemotherapy on the contrast enhanced T1-weighted images (CE-T1W) in the portal venous phase, T2-weighted images (T2W) and b800 diffusion weighted images (DWI). DWI delineations were copied to the ADC-maps. 107 radiomics features were extracted per sequence. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated per feature. Features were considered reproducible if ICC > 0.9.

RESULTS

90% of CE-T1W features were reproducible with a median ICC of 0.98 (range 0.76-1.00). 81% of DWI features were robust with median ICC = 0.97 (range 0.38-1.00). The T2W features had a median ICC of 0.96 (range 0.55-0.99) and were reproducible in 80%. ADC showed the lowest number of reproducible features with 58% and median ICC = 0.91 (range 0.38-0.99) When considering the lower bound of the ICC 95% confidence intervals, 58%, 66%, 54% and 29% reached 0.9 for the CE-T1W, DWI, T2W and ADC features, respectively. The feature class with the best reproducibility differed per sequence.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of MRI radiomics features from CE-T1W, T2W, DWI and ADC in colorectal liver metastases were robust for segmentation variability between readers. The CE-T1W yielded slightly better reproducibility results compared to DWI and T2W. The ADC features seem more susceptible to reader differences compared to the other three sequences.

Tumor in vein (LR-TIV) and liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) v2018: diagnostic features, pitfalls, prognostic and management implications

Vascular invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), also known as tumor in vein (TIV), indicates highly invasive tumor behavior and is also associated with poor outcome. Because a diagnosis of TIV precludes liver transplantation, knowledge of the imaging findings to differentiate between TIV and bland thrombus is key for proper patient management. Prior versions of liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) included presence of TIV as part of LR-5 criteria. However, even if HCC is the most common liver malignancy associated with TIV, other tumors can have vascular invasion and may occur in cirrhotic patients. For these reasons, in LI-RADS v2017 LR-TIV has been introduced as a new different diagnostic category. The aim of this article is to discuss the diagnostic criteria of LR-TIV according to LI-RADS v2018 and analyze potential pitfalls encountered on daily clinical practice. Indeterminate cases and how to manage them will also be discussed.

Magnetic resonance imaging-derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) is a viable alternative to liver biopsy for steatosis quantification in living liver donor transplantation

This study aimed to investigate whether magnetic resonance imaging-derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) can be a viable noninvasive alternative to liver biopsy for the quantification of living liver donor steatosis. Hepatic steatosis for 143 donors was graded by MRI-PDFF. Study endpoints included liver volume regeneration in donors, recipient outcomes including length of hospital stay, deaths, primary non-function (PNF), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), and small for size syndrome (SFSS). Correlation between MRI-PDFF determined donor steatosis and endpoints were analyzed. Donors had lower steatosis grade than non-donors. Donor remnant liver regenerated to an average of 82% of pre-donation volume by 101 ± 24 days with no complications. There was no correlation between percent liver regeneration and steatosis severity. Among recipients, 4 underwent redo-transplantation and 6 died, with no association with degree of steatosis. 52 recipients (36%) fulfilled criteria for EAD (driven by INR), with no difference in hepatic steatosis between groups. MRI-PDFF reliably predicted donor outcomes. Living donors with no or mild steatosis based on MRI-PDFF (ie, <20%) and meeting other criteria for donation can expect favorable post-surgical outcomes, including liver regeneration. Recipients had a low rate of death or retransplantation with no association between mild hepatic steatosis and EAD.