AKJ Imaging and Pathology  

AKJ Imaging and Pathology is designed to aid readers in understanding the connection between clinical, radiographic, and pathologic features of a disease state. Each submission should include distinct clinical, radiologic, and pathologic sections within the case presentation and the discussion.

The format for submission to this section is as follows:

• Title: should include a short summary of the presenting feature, but not the diagnosis (ie, Dyspnea with slow-growing mass of the left hemithorax)
• Case Presentation: should include the following sections in sequence without the use of subheadings and without giving away the diagnosis:
  • A clinical findings section should mention the relevant positives and negatives while avoiding detailed description of hospital course. The focus should be on the approach taken by the authors to make the diagnosis. Comments on the differential diagnosis and a table summarizing the clinical and radiologic features of the differential diagnoses are desirable.
  • A radiologic findings section should briefly detail the plain chest radiograph (no corresponding figure need be submitted) and describe in detail the additional imaging studies performed, emphasizing findings that point to the diagnosis
  • A pathologic findings section should describe these findings in detail and should focus on correlations with the radiologic findings. The pathology presented should confirm the diagnosis. Gross pathology or high-quality, low-power images that capture the radiologic and pathologic correlation are recommended.
• What is the diagnosis? Alternative questions may also be included (ie, What study should be conducted next?) in addition to the diagnosis question.
• Diagnosis: XXX; should also include the answer to any other questions posed
• Discussion should include the following sections in sequence with the use of subheadings
  • Clinical discussion should illuminate how the clinical findings tie in with the diagnosis, addressing the typical and atypical case features. Authors are encouraged to highlight the clinical features that may alert the clinician to the diagnosis. In case of a rare disease, a brief description as well as diagnostic tests/criteria should be included. These may be tabulated. In the last paragraph, the outcomes of the case and the result of described intervention are useful.
  • Radiologic discussion should highlight specific findings from chest radiographs and CT, PET, and MR scans. Authors are encouraged to highlight findings that exclude diagnosis and elaborate on the use of particular modalities.
  • Pathologic discussion should highlight pathologic patterns of lung involvement that correspond to patterns seen on chest imaging, and the pathologic differential diagnosis of the disease under discussion should be presented. Special staining techniques that may allow the diagnosis to be established should be addressed.
• Conclusion: a bulleted list (3-4 lines at the most) of the take home message from the case for clinicians is encouraged.
• Image Quality Considerations
  1. Sizing: Images should be appropriately sized to minimize superfluous information—including, in particular, any surrounding structures outside the body.
  2. Labeling/Figure legends: Legends should include baseline information: slice thickness (in mm), orientation (axial, coronal), and reconstruction algorithm (in the case of lung, either "smooth" or "edge enhanced" or their equivalent). For contrast-enhanced pulmonary artery studies, provide the rate, timing, volume, and type of contrast as appropriate.
  3. Additional Imaging techniques: of particular interest is the addition of "movie" files (AVI or equivalent) when these augment image interpretation (eg, cardiac, aortic, or general vascular cases).
  4. The inclusion of other standard imaging formats, such as volumetrically rendered images and maximum (MIPS) and minimum (MinIPS) projection images, can be helpful.

Letter to the Editor, Response to Letter to Editor

The Letter to the Editor section publishes letters that raise questions about the methods and/or interpretation of studies published in AKJ. It is up to the discretion of the Editor in Chief whether any Correspondence is sent for external peer review and whether to accept any letter for publication.

Commenting on Recent Articles

All letters commenting on previous articles should strive to provide constructive and respectful comments of the original work. Letters should pertain to articles published within the preceding 6 weeks. Any correspondence discussing recent AKJ articles should include a short original title that does not duplicate the title of the article. Authors should include the full citation of the complete article in the reference list. For letters responding to articles published to the Online First section, AKJ will hold publication until the final version of the article is published in a numbered issue of AKJ. All accepted letters will be sent to the corresponding author of the original article with an invitation to submit a response for publication.

Response Letters

Authors are asked to submit all replies to letters on their work within 2 weeks of receiving the invitation. If they do not respond within this time frame, the original letter will be published without a response. Authors should never correspond directly with the authors of correspondence. The replying author should also include the full reference to their original work and should submit the same conflict of interest information relevant to the original work. AKJ  reserves the right to update the conflict of interest line in this regard as needed.