Underspecification is a major obstacle to the generalizability of machine learning models and defines the inability of the pipeline to ensure that the model has encoded the inner logic of the syste... The clinical deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in medical imaging is perhaps the greatest challenge facing radiology in the next decade. One of the main obstacles to the incor...

Virtual anthropology is made possible by modern cross-sectional imaging. Multislice CT (MSCT) can be used for comparative bone and dental identification, reconstructive identification and lesion identification. Comparative identification, the comparison of ante- and post-mortem imaging data, can be performed on both teeth and bones. Reconstructive identification, a considerable challenge for the radiologist, identifies the deceased by determining sex, geographical origin, stature and age at death. Lesion identification combines virtual autopsy and virtual anthropology. MSCT can be useful in palaeopathology, seeking arthropathy, infection, oral pathology, trauma, tumours, haematological disorders, stress indicators or occupational stress in bones and teeth. We examine some of the possibilities offered by this new radiological subspeciality that adds a new dimension to the work of the forensic radiologist. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial and involves communication and data exchange between radiologists, forensic pathologists, anthropologists and radiographers.

Our goal was to assess the results after orthotopic branched endovascular aortic arch repair using a new double-branch endoprosthesis in patients with thoracic aortic disease affecting the aortic arch who cannot undergo classical surgery. Within a 4-year period, 15 patients with thoracic aortic disease affecting the aortic arch were treated with the Bolton Relay plus double-branch endoprosthesis (Bolton Medical, Sunrise, FL, USA). We assessed clinical outcome, occurrence of endoleaks and the need for secondary interventions. The median logistic EuroSCORE I level was 13.6 (4.2; 22.8). The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.7%. A disabling stroke was observed in 1 (6.7%) patient, whereas non-disabling strokes occurred in 2 (13.3%) patients. Type I and III endoleaks occurred in 6.7%. The median follow-up period was 263 (1st quartile 84; 2nd quartile 564) days. Four patients died during the follow-up period. Aortic-related survival was 100%. Orthotopic branched endovascular aortic arch repair using the Bolton Relay Plus double-branch endoprosthesis is a safe and feasible technique enriching the armamentarium to treat patients with thoracic aortic disease who cannot undergo classical surgery. Aortic-related survival is excellent, and the occurrence of disabling stroke and endoleaks warranting treatment is low. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of this new method.

: OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system. METHODS: Forty-three patients with thoracic aortic pathology involving the aortic arch have been treated with the Relay Branch system (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL, USA) in 10 centres. We assessed in-hospital mortality, neurological injury, treatment success according to current reporting standards and the need for secondary interventions. In addition, outcome was analysed according to the underlying pathology: non-dissective disease versus residual aortic dissection (RAD) (defined as remaining dissection after previous type A repair, chronic type B aortic dissections). RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 9% (0% in patients with RAD). Disabling stroke occurred in 7% (0% in patients with RAD); non-disabling stroke occurred in 19% (7% in patients with RAD). Early type IA and B endoleak formation occurred in 4%. Median follow-up was 16 ± 18 months. During the follow-up period, 23% of the patients died. Aortic-related deaths were low (3% in patients with RAD). CONCLUSIONS: The results of endovascular aortic arch repair using the Relay Branch system in a selected patient population with regard to technical success are good. In-hospital mortality is acceptable, the number of disabling strokes is low and technical success is high. Non-disabling stroke is a major concern, and every effort has to be taken to reduce this to a minimum. The best outcome is seen in patients with underlying RAD. Finally, more data are needed.