Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess and compare diagnostic ability of LI-RADS (LR) v. 2017 and ESGAR guidelines in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis using MRI with hepatobiliary contrast agents. Methods Seventy pathologically confirmed lesions in 32 patients (24 males and 8 females) who had MRI with hepatobiliary contrast done before surgery or biopsy were reviewed retrospectively. Six lesions were <10mm, 31 lesions 10-19mm, and 33 lesions ≥20mm. Two readers assessed all lesions according to LI-RADS v.2017 criteria and ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents. Statistical analysis was performed to compare diagnostic ability of both guidelines including receiver operative curves (ROC) and area under curve (AUC). Results For LR ≥ 4 sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC were 96%, 75%, 88.6%, and 85.5, respectively. For LR5 they were 74%, 95%, 80%, and 84.5, respectively. For ESGAR criteria with major and additional features, they were 88%, 75%, 84.3%, and 81.5, respectively. For ESGAR criteria only with major features they were 78%, 80%, 78.6%, and 79, respectively. AUC analysis revealed that overall diagnostic ability of LI-RADS was higher than ESGAR but the results did not show statistical significance. Conclusions Both LI-RADS and ESGAR guidelines presented high diagnostic ability in HCC diagnosis of MRI studies with hepatobiliary contrast agents. More complex LI-RADS criteria performed better than ESGAR guidelines and it may justify extra effort that needs to be put in the report. However, the results were not statistically different and the simplicity of the ESGAR guidelines should also be taken into consideration.

The Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS or LR) is a classification system for reading and reporting imaging studies in patients with high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). One of its main goals is to improve communication between specialties, especially radiologists, hepatologists, surgeons, and pathologists. LI-RADS defines imaging features of the lesions and stratifies the risk of HCC into categories. It is the most comprehensive and highly specific system; however, its seeming complexity prevents many radiologists from using it in everyday practice. This article is a detailed review of the latest version of LI-RADS (v. 2017), which should be helpful for radiologists who are not very familiar with the system and its latest update.

Background: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a rare acquired polyneuropathy that especially among youngest children should be differentiated with hereditary neuropathies. Even though upon diagnosis treatment options are similar in children and adults, diagnostic challenges are faced in the pediatric population.Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinical symptoms, nerve conduction study results, modes of treatment, and final outcome in 37 children aged 3.5–17 years with a final diagnosis of CIDP (18 girls, 19 boys). We established three groups of patients based on age at onset of CIDP: 0–4, 4–13, and 13–18 years. Follow-up ranged from 10 to 222 months.Results: In our analysis, 19/37 patients (51.4%) had an atypical presentation: distal variant of CIDP in 12/37 patients (32.4%) and pure motor variant of CIDP in 5/37 patients (13.5%), and one patient had a pure sensory variant (1/37, 2.7%). Furthermore, 3/37 patients (8.1%) had additional concurring symptoms, including involuntary movements of face muscles (1/37, 2.7%) or hand tremor (2/37, 5.4%). During the follow-up, 23/37 patients (62.2%) received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg); 22/37 patients (59.5%) received steroids, 6/37 patients (16.2%) received IVIg and steroids, and 12/37 patients (32.4%) received immunosuppressive drugs, mostly azathioprine, but also methotrexate and rituximab. One patient was treated with plasmapheresis. Complete remission was achieved in 19/37 patients (51.4%) with CIDP in its typical form. Remission with residual symptoms or minimal deficit was observed in 4/37 patients (10.8%), whereas 14/37 patients (37.8%) remain on treatment with gradual improvement.Conclusion: Childhood CIDP may occur in its typical form, but even ~50% of children can present as an atypical variant including distal, pure motor, or pure sensory. Most children have a good prognosis; however, many of them may require long-term treatment. This highlights the importance of an early diagnosis and treatment for childhood CIDP.

No abstract