Gliomas are the most frequent intrinsic central nervous system tumors. The new 2021 WHO Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors brought significant changes into the classification of gliomas, that underline the role of molecular diagnostics, with the adult-type diffuse glial tumors now identified primarily by their biomarkers rather than histology. The status of the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 or 2 describes tumors at their molecular level and together with the presence or absence of 1p/19q codeletion are the most important biomarkers used for the classification of adult-type diffuse glial tumors. In recent years terminology has also changed. IDH-mutant, as previously known, is diagnostically used as astrocytoma and IDH-wildtype is used as glioblastoma. A comprehensive understanding of these tumors not only gives patients a more proper treatment and better prognosis but also highlights new difficulties. MR imaging is of the utmost importance for diagnosing and supervising the response to treatment. By monitoring the tumor on followup exams better results can be achieved. Correlations are seen between tumor diagnostic and clinical manifestation and surgical administration, followup care, oncologic treatment, and outcomes. Minimal resection site use of functional imaging (fMRI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) have become indispensable tools in invasive treatment. Perfusion imaging provides insightful information about the vascularity of the tumor, spectroscopy shows metabolic activity, and nuclear medicine imaging displays tumor metabolism. To accommodate better treatment the differentiation of pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse, or radiation necrosis is needed. In this report, we present a literature review of diagnostics of gliomas, the differences in their imaging features, and our radiology’s departments accumulated experience concerning gliomas.

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is regarded as the gold standard for assessing the functional significance of coronary artery lesions. However, its utilization in clinical practice remains limited. This study aims to determine whether FFR results can influence treatment decisions for coronary artery disease compared to visual assessments of angiographic images. We conducted a retrospective study involving 63 patients diagnosed with either chronic coronary syndrome (n = 39, 61.9%) or acute coronary syndrome (n = 24, 38.1%) who underwent an FFR assessment. Three experienced interventional cardiologists (>300 PCI procedures/year) reevaluated 105 ambiguous coronary lesions in these patients, blinded to the FFR results. The objective was to assess lesion significance and determine the treatment strategy based on a visual angiographic evaluation. The three operators reached concordant agreement (≥two operators) to perform PCI in 60 (57.1%) of the evaluated lesions based on the angiographic assessment. Of these, nine lesions (15%) were deemed functionally non-significant by FFR (FFR > 0.80). Conversely, they agreed to defer PCI in 45 (42.9%) lesions, but 4 lesions (8.9%) were found to be functionally significant (FFR ≤ 0.80) and required a re-evaluation for PCI. Visual-guided decision making by interventional cardiologists shows variability and does not always align with the functional significance of coronary lesions as determined by FFR. Incorporating FFR into routine decision making could enhance treatment accuracy and patient outcomes.

SARS-COV-2 infection primarily affects the respiratory system with emerging complications, but can also involve other systems and organs, as well as cause coagulopathy. Cases of deep vein thrombosis with pulmonary thromboembolic complications are commonly reported in critically ill patients with COVID-19, much less frequently encountered is thrombosis in the arterial bed. Particularly rare are cases of concomitant thrombosis in multiple sites. We present a case with multiple arterial thrombosis in a patient with COVID-19 and increased cardiovascular risk.