These statements are endorsed by the American College of Radiology and the National Kidney Foundation to improve and standardize the care of patients with impaired kidney function who have indicati... Intravenous iodinated contrast media are commonly used with CT to evaluate disease and to determine treatment response. The risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) developing in patients with reduced kid...

Inaugural consensus statements were developed and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR) and National Kidney Foundation to improve and standardize the care of patients with kidney disease who have indication(s) to receive ACR-designated group II or group III intravenous gadolinium-based contrast media (GBCM). The risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) from group II GBCM in patients with advanced kidney disease is thought to be very low (zero events following 4931 administrations to patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <30 mL/min per 1.73 m²; upper bounds of the 95% confidence intervals: 0.07% overall, 0.2% for stage 5D chronic kidney disease [CKD], 0.5% for stage 5 CKD and no dialysis). No unconfounded cases of NSF have been reported for the only available group III GBCM (gadoxetate disodium). Depending on the clinical indication, the potential harms of delaying or withholding group II or group III GBCM for an MRI in a patient with acute kidney injury or eGFR less than 30 mL/min per 1.73 m² should be balanced against and may outweigh the risk of NSF. Dialysis initiation or alteration is likely unnecessary based on group II or group III GBCM administration.

CT deep learning reconstruction improved image quality, had better object detection performance and radiologist confidence, and may be used for a greater radiation dose reduction potential than alt... Background CT deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithms have been developed to remove image noise. How the DLR affects image quality and radiation dose reduction has yet to be fully investigate...

Using standardized nomenclature for image interpretation and reporting of small bowel Crohn disease at CT enterography and MR enterography can help guide medical and surgical management. Representatives from the Society of Abdominal Radiology Crohn’s Disease–Focused Panel, the Society for Pediatric Radiology, the American Gastroenterological Association, and other international exp...

Quantitative imaging biomarkers of liver disease measured by using MRI and US are emerging as important clinical tools in the management of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Because of their high accuracy and noninvasive nature, in many cases, these techniques have replaced liver biopsy for the diagnosis, quantitative staging, and treatment monitoring of patients with CLD. The most commonly evaluated imaging biomarkers are surrogates for liver fibrosis, fat, and iron. MR elastography is now routinely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and typically combined with MRI-based liver fat and iron quantification to exclude or grade hepatic steatosis and iron overload, respectively. US elastography is also widely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and has the advantage of lower equipment cost and greater availability compared with those of MRI. Emerging US fat quantification methods can be performed along with US elastography. The author group, consisting of members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Liver Fibrosis Disease-Focused Panel (DFP), the SAR Hepatic Iron Overload DFP, and the European Society of Radiology, review the basics of liver fibrosis, fat, and iron quantification with MRI and liver fibrosis and fat quantification with US. The authors cover technical requirements, typical case display, quality control and proper measurement technique and case interpretation guidelines, pitfalls, and confounding factors. The authors aim to provide a practical guide for radiologists interpreting these examinations. ^© RSNA, 2023 See the invited commentary by Ronot in this issue. Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Diagnostic performance with MR imaging appears to be comparable to that of CT for detection of pediatric appendicitis and appendiceal perforation, with similar rates of alternative diagnoses and appendiceal visualization. PurposeTo determine retrospectively the clinical effectiveness of an unenhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocol for evaluation of equivocal appendicitis in children.Materials and MethodsInstitutional review board approval was obtained. Pediatric patients (≤18 years old) underwent unenhanced MR imaging and contrast material–enhanced computed tomography (CT) of the appendix between December 2013 and November 2014 and December 2012 and November 2013, respectively, within 24 hours after an abdominal ultrasonographic examination with results equivocal for appendicitis. Pertinent MR imaging and CT reports were reviewed for visibility of the appendix, presence of appendicitis and appendiceal perforation, and establishment of an alternative diagnosis. Surgical reports, pathologic reports, and 30-day follow-up medical records were used as reference standards. Diagnostic performance with MR imaging and CT was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for diagnosis of appendicitis and appendiceal perfo...