Elastography in Chronic Liver Disease: Modalities, Techniques, Limitations, and Future Directions.

Chronic liver disease has multiple causes, many of which are increasing in prevalence. The final common pathway of chronic liver disease is tissue destruction and attempted regeneration, a pathway that triggers fibrosis and eventual cirrhosis. Assessment of fibrosis is important not only for diagnosis but also for management, prognostic evaluation, and follow-up of patients with chronic liver disease. Although liver biopsy has traditionally been considered the reference standard for assessment of liver fibrosis, noninvasive techniques are the emerging focus in this field. Ultrasound-based elastography and magnetic resonance (MR) elastography are gaining popularity as the modalities of choice for quantifying hepatic fibrosis. These techniques have been proven superior to conventional cross-sectional imaging for evaluation of fibrosis, especially in the precirrhotic stages. Moreover, elastography has added utility in the follow-up of previously diagnosed fibrosis, the assessment of treatment response, evaluation for the presence of portal hypertension (spleen elastography), and evaluation of patients with unexplained portal hypertension. In this article, a brief overview is provided of chronic liver disease and the tools used for its diagnosis. Ultrasound-based elastography and MR elastography are explored in depth, including a brief glimpse into the evolution of elastography. Elastography is based on the principle of measuring tissue response to a known mechanical stimulus. Specific elastographic techniques used to exploit this principle include MR elastography and ultrasonography-based static or quasistatic strain imaging, one-dimensional transient elastography, point shear-wave elastography, and supersonic shear-wave elastography. The advantages, limitations, and pitfalls of each modality are emphasized. ©RSNA, 2016.

The malpractice liability of radiology reports: minimizing the risk.

The art and science of interpreting radiologic examinations, an ability that is acquired over years of training, is on display in every radiology report. It is vital that these reports be crafted so as to both reflect the radiologist's expertise and capability and eliminate any factors that might result in unintended harm to the patient. Unfortunately, a deficient report may result in legal action against the radiologist; thus, a thorough understanding of the litigious potential of the language used in radiology reports is crucial. It is important that ambiguous vocabulary, undefined modifiers, double negatives, and generalizations be avoided. Errors in radiology reports may result from inappropriate terminology, transcription mistakes, or deficient or inadequately documented communication. Critical findings that may have an immediate impact on patient management must be promptly communicated to the referring physician and such communication fully documented. A meticulous and well-written report is the best way for radiologists to care for their patients. In addition, a well-worded report can be the deciding factor in a successful defense against a malpractice claim. Understanding the legal implications of radiology reports will enable radiologists to develop strategies for avoiding malpractice suits.