Subsequent to the widespread use of multidetector computed tomography and growing interest in lung cancer screening, small pulmonary nodules are more frequently detected. The differential diagnosis for a solitary pulmonary nodule is extremely broad and includes both benign and malignant causes. Recognition of early lung cancers is vital, since stage at diagnosis is crucial for prognosis. Estimation of the probability of malignancy is a challenging task, but crucial for follow-up and further work-up. In addition to the clinical setting and metabolic assessment, morphological assessment on thin-section computed tomography is essential. Size and growth are key factors in assessment of the malignant potential of a nodule. The likelihood of malignancy positively correlates with nodule diameter: as the diameter increases, so does the likelihood of malignancy. Although there is a considerable overlap in the features of benign and malignant nodules, the importance of morphology however should not be underestimated. Features that are associated with benignity include a perifissural location and triangular morphology, internal fat and benign calcifications. Malignancy is suspected in nodules presenting with spiculation, lobulation, pleural indentation, vascular convergence sign, associated cystic airspace, bubble-like lucencies, irregular air bronchogram, and subsolid morphology. Nodules often show different features and combination of findings is certainly more powerful.Teaching points• Size of a pulmonary nodule is important, but morphological assessment should not be underestimated.• Lung nodules should be evaluated on thin section CT, in both lung and mediastinal window setting.• Features associated with benignity include a triangular morphology, internal fat and calcifications.• Spiculation, pleural retraction and notch sign are highly suggestive of a malignant nature.• Complex features (e.g. bubble-like lucencies) are highly indicative of a malignant nature.

Autoimmune destruction of pancreatic β-cells results in the permanent loss of insulin production in type 1 diabetes (T1D). The daily necessity to inject exogenous insulin to treat hyperglycemia leads to a relative portal vein insulin deficiency and potentiates hypoglycemia which can induce weight gain, while daily fluctuations of blood sugar levels affect the hepatic glycogen storage and overall metabolic control. These, among others, fundamental characteristics of T1D are associated with the development of two distinct, but in part clinically similar hepatopathies, namely non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and glycogen hepatopathy (GlyH). Recent studies suggest that NAFLD may be increasingly common in T1D because more people with T1D present with overweight and/or obesity, linked to the metabolic syndrome. GlyH is a rare but underdiagnosed complication hallmarked by extremely brittle metabolic control in, often young, individuals with T1D. Both hepatopathies share clinical similarities, troubling both diagnosis and differentiation. Since NAFLD is increasingly associated with cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease, whereas GlyH is considered self-limiting, awareness and differentiation between both condition is important in clinical care. The exact pathogenesis of both hepatopathies remains obscure, hence licensed pharmaceutical therapy is lacking and general awareness amongst physicians is low. This article aims to review the factors potentially contributing to fatty liver disease or glycogen storage disruption in T1D. It ends with a proposal for clinicians to approach patients with T1D and potential hepatopathy.

No abstract

Background: The correlation of diffusion-weighted MRI and tumor aggressiveness has been established for different tumor types, which leads to the question if it could also apply for neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Purpose: To investigate the possible correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and histopathologic WHO-grades of NET. Material and Methods: Electronic patient records from patients presented at the multidisciplinary neuroendocrine tumor board between November 2017 and April 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with both available MR imaging (primary tumor or metastasis) and known WHO tumor grade were included (n = 47). Average and minimum ADC values (avgADC; minADC) were measured by drawing a freehand ROI excluding only the outermost border of the lesion. The largest axial size (primary tumor) or most clearly delineated lesion (metastasis) was used. Results: Forty seven patients met the inclusion criteria (mean age 59 ± 12 SD; 24F/23M). Twenty one patients (45%) were diagnosed with WHO G1 tumor, 17 seventeen with G2 (36%) and nine with G3 (19%) tumor. Twenty eight primary tumors and 19 metastases were measured. A significant difference was found between low-grade (G1+G2) and high-grade (G3) tumors (Mann-Whitney; avgADC: p < 0,001; minADC: p = 0,001). There was a moderate negative correlation between WHO-grade and avgADC/minADC (Spearman; avgADC:-0,606; 95% CI [-0,773;-0,384]; minADC:-0,581; 95% CI [-0.759;-0.353]). Conclusion: Our data show a significant difference in both average and minimum ADC values on MRI between low and high grade NET. A moderate negative correlation was found between histopathologic WHO grade and ADC value.