Results indicate that STE/Dixon-MRI data in combination with FCM-based segmentation yields precise MR-based μ-maps for PET attenuation correction in hybrid PET/MRI systems.

Background: Ultrasound has emerged as a valuable complimentary tool for assessment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Objectives: The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between ultrasound measures and clinical staging in patients with suspected POP. Patients and Methods: Forty women with clinical suspicion of POP were enrolled in this cross-sectional study between November 2011 and April 2012. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) system was used for clinical staging. Perineal ultrasound was performed both at rest and during Valsalva maneuver after proper preparation. On mid sagittal view, two reference lines were drawn; midpelvic line (MPL) was defined as the inferior horizontal tangent of symphysis pubis and H line was drawn from the most inferior part of symphysis pubis to the anorectal junction. Spearman's correlation coefficient and Kappa coefficient of agreements were used for statistical analysis.Results: Forty women with the mean age of 49.9 ± 10.07 years were enrolled. Excellent correlation was seen between MPL and H line (rho = 0.91, 0.93 and 0.88 in anterior, apical and posterior compartments, respectively). POP-Q had good-to-excellent correlation with ultrasound (rho = 0.84, 0.78 and 0.63 for H line and rho = 0.89, 0.82, 0.71 for MPL in anterior, apical and posterior compartments respectively). In anterior and apical compartments, high agreement was seen between clinical and ultrasound staging methods when grouping patients to no prolapse/mild vs. moderate/severe. In the posterior compartment, this agreement was significant when grouping was done based on the presence or absence of POP. Conclusion: Ultrasound has high correlation with POP-Q staging in all compartments for staging of pelvic organ prolapse. Ultrasound might be useful in the diagnosis of pop in those with negative clinical examination.

: The main advantage of the BI-RADS system is that when correctly applied, the ACR and BI-RADS classifications are the only necessary tools for a practical and scientific communication between radiologists and clinicians regarding the breast findings. The BI-RADS provides a common standardized language of communication by minimizing subjective interpretations. A non-specialist clinician, without an in-depth knowledge of breast imaging, should be assisted on how to manage or refer patients based on standard algorithms. Dedicated breast clinicians, despite their high level of knowledge and experience regarding breast disease and management, are not radiologists; therefore, the BI-RADS can help them organize a follow-up and perform further diagnostic examinations. Besides, radiologists who are specialized in using different modalities communicate better with each other about breast images if the BI-RADS terminology and management guidelines are applied. In this study, we present a concise and simplified description for all sections of the BI-RADS to facilitate its understanding and practical use for all practitioners, not only breast radiologists.