Breast cancer remains a major cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Imaging plays a key role in the early detection of breast cancer. Mammography is an accepted screening modality. Ultrasound and MR imaging of the breast can significantly improve cancer detection and characterisation and are used as an adjunct to mammography. Misinterpretation due to technical and human errors has a significant impact on mortality and morbidity of breast tumour/ cancer patients. The potential harm caused by breast imaging includes the creation of unnecessary anxiety, morbidity, costs and the use of ionising radiation. It is for this reason that the strongest possible emphasis on quality control and assurance is required. These start with the identification of eligible women, with the commitment that breast imaging of the highest possible standard is performed, that films are read by proper trained radiologists, that prompt and further effective investigations are provided, that outcomes are monitored and evaluated regularly, that regular audits are performed, and that training of the staff is ensured. During this session the auditorium will learn about the spectrum and factors that contribute to errors in the interpretation by breast imaging exams highlighted by case studies. Although CT is commonly regarded as the best imaging method in patients with acute abdominal symptoms, the rapid growth of its use in emergency medicine has raised concern about increasing radiation exposure to population. There is a need for strategies using a non-ionising radiation technique such as US as first approach in this clinical setting, with CT used in equivocal or negative US results. Furthermore, US may be the preferred choice to approach patients with renal impairment, since it does not need the use of potentially nephrotoxic contrast media. In addition, it must be stressed that US is clearly the first imaging approach to the pregnant patient with acute symptoms. This presentation deals with the comparison of the results of these two imaging techniques in emergency patients with acute abdomen. Their sensitivity and specificity is compared, and special attention is given to the need of a standardised complete protocol of US examination of the whole abdomen. Since the results of US are considered to be highly dependent on the level of expertise of the examiner, such protocol could possibly allow a more standardised level of results. In some cases, US may be also requested as integration to emergency CT. For instance, presence of thin septations or small echoes within fluid collections can provide clues to their nature, while small parenchymal lesions can be easily recognised as either cystic or solid without the need of dedicated CT scanning protocols. Examples are provided of the many possibilities of US in this field. In paediatric radiology abdominal ultrasonography plays an important role in dayto-day clinical practice. The well-known advantages of ultrasonography in children are the lack of ionising radiation, the bed-side applicability, the potential to perform the study without sedation, and the relative low costs of the examinations. The body composition of most children, in contrast to adults, yields an exquisite depiction of anatomical structures which makes US the paediatric abdominal imaging modality of first choice. However, CT is being increasingly used for the diagnosis of patients presenting with an acute abdomen. Overall the number of CT exams, more so in adults compared with children, has shown a steady increase over the past decades. In this session the application of both US and CT, based on clinical paediatric cases, will be discussed and compared. Both gastrointestinal as well as non gastrointestinal causes of the paediatric acute abdomen will be presented. MR mammography has become an important imaging technique, but because of low specificity, controversies remain, especially in the field of preoperative staging and screening. Some multicentre studies showed disappointing results due to inexperienced participating centres. Lack of standardisation also can be a reason of inferior results. To have the best results, MR units ≥ 1 T are necessary, with double dedicated breast coils, preferably multichannel. Regular checks using standardised quality control are recommended. Gentle pressure of the breasts must be performed to avoid motion, but this should not result in compression of vascular structures. A T2 weighted series must be done, followed by a dynamic contrastenhanced examination with slice thickness ≤ 3 mm, spatial in-plane resolution ≤ 1.5 mm2 and temporal resolution ≤ 120 s. Reporting must contain description of lesion morphology, per cent enhancement versus time curves, number and location of lesions and extent of disease. The use of a standardised interpretation system, such as the BI-RADS lexicon, is recommended. Clinical examination, mammography, ultrasound and earlier MR must be included in the interpretation. To reduce false positives, MR mammography must be performed between day 7 and 12 of the menstrual cycle or at least 4 weeks after stop of hormone substitution therapy, except in urgent cases. To optimise specificity, techniques as diffusion, spectroscopy and ultra fast scanning have been studied and new signs are described. But of utmost importance to make MR mammography a useful examination is to reserve it only for good indications. Contrast-enhanced MRI has proven to be superior in the detection and staging of breast cancer. Besides the primary tumour stage the lymph node (LN) status and the presence of distant metastases have significant impact on treatment planning and overall prognosis. Even small LN metastases can already have a negative impact on the disease-free and overall survival of patients. Sentinel LN biopsy or complete axillary LN dissection remains the standard of care in spite of the associated morbidity. Diagnostic imaging strategies using ultrasound (with FNA), MRI or FDG/PET can be used in the preoperative LN evaluation. Due to the limited accuracy of these strategies they are so far not able to overcome the surgical standard and reduce the patient's morbidity. The presence of distant metastases results in a stage IV breast cancer and is considered non curable with a 10-year survival of about 10%. For the detection of distant metastases a chest x-ray, liver ultrasound and bone scintigraphy (BS) are commonly used. PET/CT or whole body Learning Objectives: