Cargando…

Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards

Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB) are an essential part of brain tumor care, but quantifying the impact of imaging on patient management is challenging due to treatment complexity and a lack of quantitative outcome measures. This work uses a structured reporting system for classifying brain tumor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abidi, Syed A., Hoch, Michael J., Hu, Ranliang, Sadigh, Gelareh, Voloschin, Alfredo, Olson, Jeffrey J., Shu, Hui-Kuo G., Neill, Stewart G., Weinberg, Brent D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10146901/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37104141
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography9020070
_version_ 1785034689543667712
author Abidi, Syed A.
Hoch, Michael J.
Hu, Ranliang
Sadigh, Gelareh
Voloschin, Alfredo
Olson, Jeffrey J.
Shu, Hui-Kuo G.
Neill, Stewart G.
Weinberg, Brent D.
author_facet Abidi, Syed A.
Hoch, Michael J.
Hu, Ranliang
Sadigh, Gelareh
Voloschin, Alfredo
Olson, Jeffrey J.
Shu, Hui-Kuo G.
Neill, Stewart G.
Weinberg, Brent D.
author_sort Abidi, Syed A.
collection PubMed
description Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB) are an essential part of brain tumor care, but quantifying the impact of imaging on patient management is challenging due to treatment complexity and a lack of quantitative outcome measures. This work uses a structured reporting system for classifying brain tumor MRIs, the brain tumor reporting and data system (BT-RADS), in a TB setting to prospectively assess the impact of imaging review on patient management. Published criteria were used to prospectively assign three separate BT-RADS scores (an initial radiology report, secondary TB presenter review, and TB consensus) to brain MRIs reviewed at an adult brain TB. Clinical recommendations at TB were noted and management changes within 90 days after TB were determined by chart review. In total, 212 MRIs in 130 patients (median age = 57 years) were reviewed. Agreement was 82.2% between report and presenter, 79.0% between report and consensus, and 90.1% between presenter and consensus. Rates of management change increased with increasing BT-RADS scores (0—3.1%, 1a—0%, 1b—66.7%, 2—8.3%, 3a—38.5%, 3b—55.9, 3c—92.0%, and 4—95.6%). Of 184 (86.8%) cases with clinical follow-up within 90 days after the tumor board, 155 (84.2%) of the recommendations were implemented. Structured scoring of MRIs provides a quantitative way to assess rates of agreement interpretation alongside how often management changes are recommended and implemented in a TB setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10146901
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101469012023-04-29 Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards Abidi, Syed A. Hoch, Michael J. Hu, Ranliang Sadigh, Gelareh Voloschin, Alfredo Olson, Jeffrey J. Shu, Hui-Kuo G. Neill, Stewart G. Weinberg, Brent D. Tomography Article Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TB) are an essential part of brain tumor care, but quantifying the impact of imaging on patient management is challenging due to treatment complexity and a lack of quantitative outcome measures. This work uses a structured reporting system for classifying brain tumor MRIs, the brain tumor reporting and data system (BT-RADS), in a TB setting to prospectively assess the impact of imaging review on patient management. Published criteria were used to prospectively assign three separate BT-RADS scores (an initial radiology report, secondary TB presenter review, and TB consensus) to brain MRIs reviewed at an adult brain TB. Clinical recommendations at TB were noted and management changes within 90 days after TB were determined by chart review. In total, 212 MRIs in 130 patients (median age = 57 years) were reviewed. Agreement was 82.2% between report and presenter, 79.0% between report and consensus, and 90.1% between presenter and consensus. Rates of management change increased with increasing BT-RADS scores (0—3.1%, 1a—0%, 1b—66.7%, 2—8.3%, 3a—38.5%, 3b—55.9, 3c—92.0%, and 4—95.6%). Of 184 (86.8%) cases with clinical follow-up within 90 days after the tumor board, 155 (84.2%) of the recommendations were implemented. Structured scoring of MRIs provides a quantitative way to assess rates of agreement interpretation alongside how often management changes are recommended and implemented in a TB setting. MDPI 2023-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10146901/ /pubmed/37104141 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography9020070 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Abidi, Syed A.
Hoch, Michael J.
Hu, Ranliang
Sadigh, Gelareh
Voloschin, Alfredo
Olson, Jeffrey J.
Shu, Hui-Kuo G.
Neill, Stewart G.
Weinberg, Brent D.
Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title_full Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title_fullStr Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title_full_unstemmed Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title_short Using Brain Tumor MRI Structured Reporting to Quantify the Impact of Imaging on Brain Tumor Boards
title_sort using brain tumor mri structured reporting to quantify the impact of imaging on brain tumor boards
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10146901/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37104141
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography9020070
work_keys_str_mv AT abidisyeda usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT hochmichaelj usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT huranliang usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT sadighgelareh usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT voloschinalfredo usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT olsonjeffreyj usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT shuhuikuog usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT neillstewartg usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards
AT weinbergbrentd usingbraintumormristructuredreportingtoquantifytheimpactofimagingonbraintumorboards