The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is composed of four individual algorithms intended to standardize the lexicon, as well as reporting and care, in patients with or at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma in the context of surveillance with US; diagnosis with CT, MRI, or contrast material-enhanced US; and assessment of treatment response with CT or MRI. This report provides a broad overview of LI-RADS, including its historic development, relationship to other imaging guidelines, composition, aims, and future directions. In addition, readers will understand the motivation for and key components of the 2018 update.

To improve standardization and consensus regarding performance, interpreting, and reporting computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations of the liver in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), LI‐RADS (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System) was launched in March 2011 and adopted by many clinical practices throughout the world. LI‐RADS categorizes nodules recognized at CT or MRI, in patients at high risk of HCC, as definitively benign, probably benign, intermediate probability of being HCC, probably HCC, and definitively HCC (corresponding to LI‐RADS categories 1‐5). The LI‐RADS Management Working Group, consisting of internationally recognized medical and surgical experts on HCC management, as well as radiologists involved in the development of LI‐RADS, was convened to evaluate management implications related to radiological categorization of the estimated probability that a lesion will be ultimately diagnosed as HCC. In this commentary, we briefly review LI‐RADS and the initial consensus of the LI‐RADS Management Working Group reached during its deliberations in 2013. We then focus on initial discordance of LI‐RADS with American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Organ Procurement Transplant Network guidelines, the basis for these differences, and how they are being addressed going forward to optimize reporting of CT and MRI findings in patients at risk for HCC and to increase consensus throughout the international community of physicians involved in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC. (Hepatology 2015;61:1056–1065)

Clinical ADC measurements of abdominal organs and lesions using parallel imaging appear to be reliable and useful, and the effect of parallel imaging on calculated values is considered to be minimal.

Many treatment options are available to patients with endometrial, cervical, or ovarian cancer. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging plays an important role in the patient journey from the initial evaluation of the extent of the disease to appropriate treatment selection and follow-up. The purpose of this review is to highlight the added role of MR imaging in the treatment stratification and overall care of patients with endometrial, cervical, or ovarian cancer. Several MR imaging techniques used in evaluation of patients with gynecologic malignancies are described, including both anatomic MR imaging sequences (T1- and T2-weighted sequences) and pulse sequences that characterize tissue on the basis of physiologic features (diffusion-weighted MR imaging), dynamic contrast agent-enhanced MR imaging, and MR spectroscopy. MR imaging findings corresponding to the 2009 revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging of gynecologic malignancies are also described in detail, highlighting possible pearls and pitfalls of staging. With the growing role of the radiologist as a core member of the multidisciplinary treatment planning team, it is crucial for imagers to recognize that MR imaging has become central in tailoring treatment options and therapy in patients with gynecologic malignancies.

The prevalence of pancreatic cysts at single-shot fast SE MR imaging-especially cysts with a diameter smaller than 10 mm-is similar to that of pancreatic cysts at autopsy and higher than that of pancreatic cysts at transabdominal ultrasonography. Prevalence is especially high in patients with pancreatitis.