Background The standard for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 virus is reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, but chest CT may play a complimentary role in the early detection of COVI...

At 6-month follow-up chest CT, COVID-19 postacute sequelae were detected in 72% of patients: fibrotic-like changes were the most common residual findings (72%), followed by ground-glass opacities (... Background The long-term post acute pulmonary sequelae of COVID-19 remain unknown. Purpose To evaluate lung injury in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia at six-month follow-up compared to base...

Radiomics is a new emerging field that includes extraction of metrics and quantification of so-called radiomic features from medical images. The growing importance of radiomics applied to oncology in improving diagnosis, cancer staging and grading, and improved personalized treatment, has been well established; yet, this new analysis technique has still few applications in cardiovascular imaging. Several studies have shown promising results describing how radiomics principles could improve the diagnostic accuracy of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosis, risk stratification, and follow-up of patients with coronary heart disease (CAD), ischemic heart disease (IHD), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), hypertensive heart disease (HHD), and many other cardiovascular diseases. Such quantitative approach could be useful to overcome the main limitations of CCTA and MRI in the evaluation of cardiovascular diseases, such as readers’ subjectiveness and lack of repeatability. Moreover, this new discipline could potentially overcome some technical problems, namely the need of contrast administration or invasive examinations. Despite such advantages, radiomics is still not applied in clinical routine, due to lack of standardized parameters acquisition, inconsistent radiomic methods, lack of external validation, and different knowledge and experience among the readers. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide a recent update on the status of radiomics clinical applications in cardiovascular imaging.

Radiomics has been playing a pivotal role in oncological translational imaging, particularly in cancer diagnosis, prediction prognosis, and therapy response assessment. Recently, promising results were achieved in management of cancer patients by extracting mineable high-dimensional data from medical images, supporting clinicians in decision-making process in the new era of target therapy and personalized medicine. Radiomics could provide quantitative data, extracted from medical images, that could reflect microenvironmental tumor heterogeneity, which might be a useful information for treatment tailoring. Thus, it could be helpful to overcome the main limitations of traditional tumor biopsy, often affected by bias in tumor sampling, lack of repeatability and possible procedure complications. This quantitative approach has been widely investigated as a non-invasive and an objective imaging biomarker in cancer patients; however, it is not applied as a clinical routine due to several limitations related to lack of standardization and validation of images acquisition protocols, features segmentation, extraction, processing, and data analysis. This field is in continuous evolution in each type of cancer, and results support the idea that in the future Radiomics might be a reliable application in oncologic imaging. The first part of this review aimed to describe some radiomic technical principles and clinical applications to gastrointestinal oncologic imaging (CT and MRI) with a focus on diagnosis, prediction prognosis, and assessment of response to therapy.

Purpose: To perform a comprehensive intraindividual objective and subjective image quality evaluation of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) reconstructed with deep learning image reconstruction (DLIR) and to assess correlation with routinely applied hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm (ASiR-V). Material and methods: Fifty-one patients (29 males) undergoing clinically indicated CCTA from April to December 2021 were prospectively enrolled. Fourteen datasets were reconstructed for each patient: three DLIR strength levels (DLIR_L, DLIR_M, and DLIR_H), ASiR-V from 10% to 100% in 10%-increment, and filtered back-projection (FBP). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) determined objective image quality. Subjective image quality was assessed with a 4-point Likert scale. Concordance between reconstruction algorithms was assessed by Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: DLIR algorithm did not impact vascular attenuation (P ≥ 0.374). DLIR_H showed the lowest noise, comparable with ASiR-V 100% (P = 1) and significantly lower than other reconstructions (P ≤ 0.021). DLIR_H achieved the highest objective quality, with SNR and CNR comparable to ASiR-V 100% (P = 0.139 and 0.075, respectively). DLIR_M obtained comparable objective image quality with ASiR-V 80% and 90% (P ≥ 0.281), while achieved the highest subjective image quality (4, IQR: 4–4; P ≤ 0.001). DLIR and ASiR-V datasets returned a very strong correlation in the assessment of CAD (r = 0.874, P = 0.001). Conclusion: DLIR_M significantly improves CCTA image quality and has very strong correlation with routinely applied ASiR-V 50% dataset in the diagnosis of CAD.

Purpose: To compare liver MRI with AIR Recon Deep Learning™(ARDL) algorithm applied and turned-off (NON-DL) with conventional high-resolution acquisition (NAÏVE) sequences, in terms of quantitative and qualitative image analysis and scanning time. Material and methods: This prospective study included fifty consecutive volunteers (31 female, mean age 55.5 ± 20 years) from September to November 2021. 1.5 T MRI was performed and included three sets of images: axial single-shot fast spin-echo (SSFSE) T2 images, diffusion-weighted images(DWI) and apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC) maps acquired with both ARDL and NAÏVE protocol; the NON-DL images, were also assessed. Two radiologists in consensus drew fixed regions of interest in liver parenchyma to calculate signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) and contrast to-noise-ratio (CNR). Subjective image quality was assessed by two other radiologists independently with a five-point Likert scale. Acquisition time was recorded. Results: SSFSE T2 objective analysis showed higher SNR and CNR for ARDL vs NAÏVE, ARDL vs NON-DL(all P < 0.013). Regarding DWI, no differences were found for SNR with ARDL vs NAÏVE and, ARDL vs NON-DL (all P > 0.2517).CNR was higher for ARDL vs NON-DL(P = 0.0170), whereas no differences were found between ARDL and NAÏVE(P = 1). No differences were observed for all three comparisons, in terms of SNR and CNR, for ADC maps (all P > 0.32). Qualitative analysis for all sequences showed better overall image quality for ARDL with lower truncation artifacts, higher sharpness and contrast (all P < 0.0070) with excellent inter-rater agreement (k ≥ 0.8143). Acquisition time was lower in ARDL sequences compared to NAÏVE (SSFSE T2 = 19.08 ± 2.5 s vs. 24.1 ± 2 s and DWI = 207.3 ± 54 s vs. 513.6 ± 98.6 s, all P < 0.0001). Conclusion: ARDL applied on upper abdomen showed overall better image quality and reduced scanning time compared with NAÏVE protocol.