OLORECTAL CANCER (CRC) accounts for approximately 210 000 deaths each year in Europe. 1 The majority of CRCs arise within adenomatous polyps, 2 and polypectomy is associated with a reduction in CRC incidence and mortality. 3 The target lesions in mass screening programs are advanced adenomas, which harbor the greatest cancer risk, and early stage CRC, 4 but adherence to screening procedures remains suboptimal. 5,6 Computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been shown to be sufficiently accurate in detecting colorectal neoplasia. 7,8 Less invasive and better tolerated than colonoscopy, 9,10 CT colo-nography is now considered a valid alternative for CRC screening in the general population. 11 Individuals with first-degree family history of advanced colorectal neoplasia, those who have had resection of co-For editorial comment see p 2498. Context Computed tomographic (CT) colonography has been recognized as an alternative for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk individuals, but less information is available on its performance in individuals at increased risk of CRC. Objective To assess the accuracy of CT colonography in detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic individuals at increased risk of CRC using unblinded colonoscopy as the reference standard. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study. Individuals at increased risk of CRC due to either family history of advanced neoplasia in first-degree relatives, personal history of colorectal adenomas, or positive results from fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) were recruited in 11 Italian centers and 1 Belgian center between December 2004 and May 2007. Each participant underwent CT colonography followed by colonoscopy on the same day. Main Outcome Measures Sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in detecting individuals with advanced neoplasia (ie, advanced adenoma or CRC) 6 mm or larger. Results Of 1103 participants, 937 were included in the final analysis: 373 cases in the family-history group, 343 in the group with personal history of adenomas, and 221 in the FOBT-positive group. Overall, CT colonography identified 151 of 177 participants with advanced neoplasia 6 mm or larger (sensitivity, 85.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 79.0%-90.0%) and correctly classified results as negative for 667 of 760 participants without such lesions (specificity, 87.8%; 95% CI, 85.2%-90.0%). The positive and negative predictive values were 61.9% (95% CI, 55.4%-68.0%) and 96.3% (95% CI, 94.6%-97.5%), respectively; after group stratification, a significantly lower negative predictive value was found for the FOBT-positive group (84.9%; 95% CI, 76.2%-91.3%; PϽ.001). Conclusions In a group of persons at increased risk for CRC, CT colonography compared with colonoscopy resulted in a negative predictive value of 96.3% overall. When limited to FOBT-positive persons, the negative predictive value was 84.9%.

No abstract

This paper aims to provide a review of the basis for application of AI in radiology, to discuss the immediate ethical and professional impact in radiology, and to consider possible future evolution. Even if AI does add significant value to image interpretation, there are implications outside the traditional radiology activities of lesion detection and characterisation. In radiomics, AI can foster the analysis of the features and help in the correlation with other omics data. Imaging biobanks would become a necessary infrastructure to organise and share the image data from which AI models can be trained. AI can be used as an optimising tool to assist the technologist and radiologist in choosing a personalised patient’s protocol, tracking the patient’s dose parameters, providing an estimate of the radiation risks. AI can also aid the reporting workflow and help the linking between words, images, and quantitative data. Finally, AI coupled with CDS can improve the decision process and thereby optimise clinical and radiological workflow.

The COVID-19 pandemic started in Italy in February 2020 with an exponential growth that has exceeded the number of cases reported in China. Italian radiology departments found themselves at the forefront in the management of suspected and positive COVID cases, both in diagnosis, in estimating the severity of the disease and in follow-up. In this context SIRM recommends chest X-ray as first-line imaging tool, CT as additional tool that shows typical features of COVID pneumonia, and ultrasound of the lungs as monitoring tool. SIRM recommends, as high priority, to ensure appropriate sanitation procedures on the scan equipment after detecting any suspected or positive COVID-19 patients. In this emergency situation, several expectations have been raised by the scientific community about the role that artificial intelligence can have in improving the diagnosis and treatment of coronavirus infection, and SIRM wishes to deliver clear statements to the radiological community, on the usefulness of artificial intelligence as a radiological decision support system in COVID-19 positive patients.(1) SIRM supports the research on the use of artificial intelligence as a predictive and prognostic decision support system, especially in hospitalized patients and those admitted to intensive care, and welcomes single center of multicenter studies for a clinical validation of the test. (2) SIRM does not support the use of CT with artificial intelligence for screening or as first-line test to diagnose COVID-19. (3) Chest CT with artificial intelligence cannot replace molecular diagnosis tests with nose-pharyngeal swab (rRT-PCR) in suspected for COVID-19 patients.

In this selected group of patients, CT colonography provided complete information to properly address surgery of colorectal cancer and treatment of liver metastases.

ObjectiveTo update quality standards for CT colonography based on consensus among opinion leaders within the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR).Material and methodsA multinational European panel of nine members of the ESGAR CT colonography Working Group (representing six EU countries) used a modified Delphi process to rate their level of agreement on a variety of statements pertaining to the acquisition, interpretation and implementation of CT colonography. Four Delphi rounds were conducted, each at 2 months interval.ResultsThe panel elaborated 86 statements.In the final round the panelists achieved complete consensus in 71 of 86 statements (82 %). Categories including the highest proportion of statements with excellent Cronbach's internal reliability were colon distension, scan parameters, use of intravenous contrast agents, general guidelines on patient preparation, role of CAD and lesion measurement.Lower internal reliability was achieved for the use of a rectal tube, spasmolytics, decubitus positioning and number of CT data acquisitions, faecal tagging, 2D vs. 3D reading, and reporting.ConclusionThe recommendations of the consensus should be useful for both the radiologist who is starting a CTC service and for those who have already implemented the technique but whose practice may need updating.Key Points• Computed tomographic colonography is the optimal radiological method of assessing the colon• This article reviews ESGAR quality standards for CT colonography• This article is aimed to provide CT-colonography guidelines for practising radiologists• The recommendations should help radiologists who are starting/updating their CTC services

ObjectivesTo develop a consensus and provide updated recommendations on liver MR imaging and the clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents.MethodsThe European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) formed a multinational European panel of experts, selected on the basis of a literature review and their leadership in the field of liver MR imaging. A modified Delphi process was adopted to draft a list of statements. Descriptive and Cronbach’s statistics were used to rate levels of agreement and internal reliability of the consensus.ResultsThree Delphi rounds were conducted and 76 statements composed on MR technique (n = 17), clinical application of liver-specific contrast agents in benign, focal liver lesions (n = 7), malignant liver lesions in non-cirrhotic (n = 9) and in cirrhotic patients (n = 18), diffuse and vascular liver diseases (n = 12), and bile ducts (n = 13). The overall mean score of agreement was 4.84 (SD ±0.17). Full consensus was reached in 22 % of all statements in all working groups, with no full consensus reached on diffuse and vascular diseases.ConclusionsThe consensus provided updated recommendations on the methodology, and clinical indications, of MRI with liver specific contrast agents in the study of liver diseases.Key points• Liver-specific contrast agents are recommended in MRI of the liver.• The hepatobiliary phase improves the detection and characterization of hepatocellular lesions.• Liver-specific contrast agents can improve the detection of HCC.

No abstract