Evolutions in rectal cancer MRI staging and risk stratification in The Netherlands

Purpose To analyze how the MRI reporting of rectal cancer has evolved (following guideline updates) in The Netherlands. Methods Retrospective analysis of 712 patients (2011–2018) from 8 teaching hospitals in The Netherlands with available original radiological staging reports that were re-evaluated...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Abdominal imaging 2022-01, Vol.47 (1), p.38-47
Hauptverfasser: Bogveradze, Nino, el Khababi, Najim, Schurink, Niels W., van Griethuysen, Joost J. M., de Bie, Shira, Bosma, Gerlof, Cappendijk, Vincent C., Geenen, Remy W. F., Neijenhuis, Peter, Peterson, Gerald, Veeken, Cornelis J., Vliegen, Roy F. A., Maas, Monique, Lahaye, Max J., Beets, Geerard L., Beets-Tan, Regina G. H., Lambregts, Doenja M. J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To analyze how the MRI reporting of rectal cancer has evolved (following guideline updates) in The Netherlands. Methods Retrospective analysis of 712 patients (2011–2018) from 8 teaching hospitals in The Netherlands with available original radiological staging reports that were re-evaluated by a dedicated MR expert using updated guideline criteria. Original reports were classified as “free-text,” “semi-structured,” or “template” and completeness of reporting was documented. Patients were categorized as low versus high risk, first based on the original reports (high risk = cT3-4, cN+, and/or cMRF+) and then based on the expert re-evaluations (high risk = cT3cd-4, cN+, MRF+, and/or EMVI+). Evolutions over time were studied by splitting the inclusion period in 3 equal time periods. Results A significant increase in template reporting was observed (from 1.6 to 17.6–29.6%; p  
ISSN:2366-004X
2366-0058
DOI:10.1007/s00261-021-03281-8