The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes the interpretation, reporting, and data collection for imaging examinations in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It assigns category codes reflecting relative probability of HCC to imaging-detected liver observations based on major and ancillary imaging features. LI-RADS also includes imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Supported and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the system has been developed by a committee of radiologists, hepatologists, pathologists, surgeons, lexicon experts, and ACR staff, with input from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the Organ Procurement Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing. Development of LI-RADS has been based on literature review, expert opinion, rounds of testing and iteration, and feedback from users. This article summarizes and assesses the quality of evidence supporting each LI-RADS major feature for diagnosis of HCC, as well as of the LI-RADS imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Based on the evidence, recommendations are provided for or against their continued inclusion in LI-RADS.q RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.An Tang REVIEW: LI-RADS Major Features for Hepatocellular Carcinoma DiagnosisTang et al selection of five major features was based on expert opinion, the literature review was performed to ensure that imaging-based diagnostic criteria were able to achieve near-100% specificity for the noninvasive diagnosis of HCC. This review focused on the evidence supporting the inclusion of imaging features and did not attempt to gather evidence on the composition of the LI-RADS diagnostic algorithm and probability of HCC for different combinations of criteria (other than the hallmark combination of APHE and washout appearance) in the LI-RADS diagnostic table.Each subgroup was charged with developing key research questions and then critically reviewing the literature to answer research questions thematically related to its assigned topic. Search StrategyThe PICO (patient population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) format frequently used in structured reviews does not lend itself well to studies of diagnostic performance. Rather than using PICO-style questions to guide the searches, therefore, the subgroups formulated free-form questions in advance with feedback from the other subgroups. A total of 10 questions were formulated under the framework and with the understanding that their answers would inform recommendations for removing or continuing to include the corresponding LI-RADS features. After the questions were formulated, each subgroup searched the PubMed develop a standardized Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for interpretation, reporting, and data collection of imaging studies in patients at risk for developing HCC (1). The committee was composed mainly of diagnostic radiologists, but also hepatologists, surgeons, patho...

Renal transplant biopsies to diagnose transplant pathology are routinely performed using ultrasound guidance. Few large studies have assessed the rate and risk factors of major biopsy complications. This study is a single-center 5-year retrospective cohort analysis of 2514 biopsies. Major complications occurred in 47 of 2514 patients (1.9%) and included hospitalization, transfusion of blood products, operative exploration and interventional radiology procedures. The complication rate among "cause" biopsies was significantly higher than in "protocol" biopsies (2.7% vs. 0.33%, p < 0.001). Complications presented on postbiopsy days 0-14, with the majority diagnosed on the same day as the biopsy and manifested by hematocrit drop, although the presence of such delayed presentation of complications occurring >24 h after the biopsy on days 2-14 is previously unreported. Specific patient characteristics associated with increased risk of a complication were increased age and blood urea nitrogen, decreased platelet count, history of prior renal transplant, deceased donor transplant type and use of anticoagulant medications but not aspirin.

Note: This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues or clients, contact us at www.rsna.org/rsnarights.

Ultrasound is the most widely used imaging tool for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening and surveillance. Until now, this method has lacked standardized guidelines for interpretation, reporting, and management recommendations [1-5]. To address this need, the American College of Radiology (ACR) has developed the Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (US LI-RADS) algorithm. The proposed algorithm has two components: detection scores and visualization scores. The detection score guides management and has three categories: US-1 Negative, US-2 Subthreshold, and US-3 Positive. The visualization score informs the expected sensitivity of the ultrasound examination and also has three categories: Visualization A: No or minimal limitations; Visualization B: Moderate limitations; and Visualization C: Severe limitations. Standardization in ultrasound utilization, reporting, and management in high-risk individuals has the capacity to improve communication with patients and referring physicians, unify screening and surveillance algorithms, impact outcomes, and supply quantitative data for future research.

The spectrum of causes of hepatic gas detected at computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) is widening. There are many iatrogenic and noniatrogenic causes of hepatic parenchymal, biliary, hepatic venous, and portal venous gas. Hepatic gas may be an indicator of serious acute disease (infarct, infection, abscess, bowel inflammation, or trauma). In other clinical scenarios, it may be an expected finding related to therapeutic interventions (such as surgery; hepatic artery embolization for a tumor or for active bleeding in acute trauma cases; percutaneous tumor ablation performed with radiofrequency, cryotherapy, laser photocoagulation, or ethanol). In some cases, hepatic gas is an incidental finding of no clinical significance. Familiarity with the expanding list of newer intervention-related causes of hepatic gas detected at CT and US, knowledge of the patient's clinical history, and a careful search for associated clues on images are all factors that may allow the radiologist to better determine the clinical relevance of this finding.