Andrea Laghi

Dr. Andrea Laghi

Radiology Unit, Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa 1035-39, 00189 Rome, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

34Years (1993-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
17 October 2017 in European Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRegina G. H. Beets-Tan
Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
DLDoenja M. J. Lambregts
Doenja M. J. Lambregts
MMMonique Maas
Monique Maas
SBShandra Bipat
Shandra Bipat
BBBrunella Barbaro
Brunella Barbaro
LBLennart Blomqvist
Lennart Blomqvist
Objectives To update the 2012 ESGAR consensus guidelines on the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for clinical staging and restaging of rectal cancer. Methods Fourteen abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) participated in a consensus meeting, organised according to an adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Two independent (non-voting) Chairs facilitated the meeting. 246 items were scored (comprising 229 items from the previous 2012 consensus and 17 additional items) and classified as ‘appropriate’ or ‘inappropriate’ (defined by ≥ 80 % consensus) or uncertain (defined by < 80 % consensus). Results Consensus was reached for 226 (92 %) of items. From these recommendations regarding hardware, patient preparation, imaging sequences and acquisition, criteria for MR imaging evaluation and reporting structure were constructed. The main additions to the 2012 consensus include recommendations regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging, criteria for nodal staging and a recommended structured report template. Conclusions These updated expert consensus recommendations should be used as clinical guidelines for primary staging and restaging of rectal cancer using MRI. Key Points • These guidelines present recommendations for staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • The guidelines were constructed through consensus amongst 14 pelvic imaging experts. • Consensus was reached by the experts for 92 % of the 246 items discussed. • Practical guidelines for nodal staging are proposed. • A structured reporting template is presented.

1 August 2015 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LGLucas L. Geyer
Lucas L. Geyer
USU. Joseph Schoepf
U. Joseph Schoepf
FMFelix G. Meinel
Felix G. Meinel
JNJr John W. Nance
Jr John W. Nance
GBGorka Bastarrika
Gorka Bastarrika
CCCarlo N. De Cecco
Carlo N. De Cecco
The current evidence on the clinical implementation of iterative reconstruction into CT protocols shows substantial promise for major improvements in image quality, chiefly noise reduction—with subsequent radiation dose reduction—and artifact suppression. Owing to recent advances in computing power, iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms have become a clinically viable option in computed tomographic (CT) imaging. Substantial evidence is accumulating about the advantages of IR algorithms over established analytical methods, such as filtered back projection. IR improves image quality through cyclic image processing. Although all available solutions share the common mechanism of artifact reduction and/or potential for radiation dose savings, chiefly due to image noise suppression, the magnitude of these effects depends on the specific IR algorithm. In the first section of this contribution, the technical bases of IR are briefly reviewed and the currently available algorithms released by the major CT manufacturers are described. In the second part, the current status of their clinical implementation is surveyed. Regardless of the applied IR algorithm, the available evidence attests to the substantial potential of IR algorithms for overcoming traditional limi...

1 August 2013 in Journal of Crohn's and Colitis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JPJ. Panes
J. Panes
YBY. Bouhnik
Y. Bouhnik
WRW. Reinisch
W. Reinisch
JSJ. Stoker
J. Stoker
STStuart A. Taylor
Stuart A. Taylor
ALAndrea Laghi
Andrea Laghi
The management of patients with IBD requires evaluation with objective tools, both at the time of diagnosis and throughout the course of the disease, to determine the location, extension, activity and severity of inflammatory lesions, as well as, the potential existence of complications. Whereas endoscopy is a well-established and uniformly performed diagnostic examination, the implementation of radiologic techniques for assessment of IBD is still heterogeneous; variations in technical aspects and the degrees of experience and preferences exist across countries in Europe. ECCO and ESGAR scientific societies jointly elaborated a consensus to establish standards for imaging in IBD using magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, ultrasonography, and including also other radiologic procedures such as conventional radiology or nuclear medicine examinations for different clinical situations that include general principles, upper GI tract, colon and rectum, perineum, liver and biliary tract, emergency situation, and the postoperative setting. The statements and general recommendations of this consensus are based on the highest level of evidence available, but significant gaps remain in certain areas such as the comparison of diagnostic accuracy between different techniques, the value for therapeutic monitoring, and the prognostic implications of particular findings.

1 July 2005 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MZMichael E. Zalis
Michael E. Zalis
MBMatthew A. Barish
Matthew A. Barish
JCJ. Richard Choi
J. Richard Choi
ADAbraham H. Dachman
Abraham H. Dachman
HFHelen M. Fenlon
Helen M. Fenlon
JYJudy Yee
Judy Yee
We have proposed a practical reporting scheme that includes recommendations for the follow-up of colonic polyps that are based on currently available published assessments of the clinical importance and expected growth potential of these lesions. © RSNA, 2005

1 August 2020 in Radiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Damiano CarusoDamiano Caruso
Damiano Caruso
MZMarta Zerunian
Marta Zerunian
MPMichela Polici
Michela Polici
Francesco PucciarelliFrancesco Pucciarelli
Francesco Pucciarelli
TPTiziano Polidori
Tiziano Polidori
ALAndrea Laghi
Andrea Laghi
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...

1 July 2020 in United European Gastroenterology Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MLMatthias Löhr
Matthias Löhr
UBUlrich Beuers
Ulrich Beuers
MVMiroslav Vujasinovic
Miroslav Vujasinovic
DADomenico Alvaro
Domenico Alvaro
JFJens Brøndum Frøkjær
Jens Brøndum Frøkjær
TGthe UEG guideline working group
the UEG guideline working group
The overall objective of these guidelines is to provide evidence‐based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)‐related digestive disease in adults and children. IgG4‐related digestive disease can be diagnosed only with a comprehensive work‐up that includes histology, organ morphology at imaging, serology, search for other organ involvement, and response to glucocorticoid treatment. Indications for treatment are symptomatic patients with obstructive jaundice, abdominal pain, posterior pancreatic pain, and involvement of extra‐pancreatic digestive organs, including IgG4‐related cholangitis. Treatment with glucocorticoids should be weight‐based and initiated at a dose of 0.6–0.8 mg/kg body weight/day orally (typical starting dose 30‐40 mg/day prednisone equivalent) for 1 month to induce remission and then be tapered within two additional months. Response to initial treatment should be assessed at week 2–4 with clinical, biochemical and morphological markers. Maintenance treatment with glucocorticoids should be considered in multi‐organ disease or history of relapse. If there is no change in disease activity and burden within 3 months, the diagnosis should be reconsidered. If the disease relapsed during the 3 months of treatment, immunosuppressive drugs should be added.