Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Structured MRI reporting increases completeness of radiological reports and requesting physicians’ satisfaction in the diagnostic workup for pelvic endometriosis

  • Pelvis
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

MRI plays an important role in the diagnosis and surgical planning of pelvic endometriosis (PE), and imaging reports should contain all relevant information (completeness). As structured reports are being increasingly utilized, we aimed to evaluate whether structured MRI reporting increases the quality of reports regarding completeness and, consequently, their perceived value by gynecologists, in comparison to free-text reports. We also aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of both formats.

Methods

We retrospectively included 28 consecutive women with histologically proven PE who underwent MRI within one month before surgery. Two abdominal radiologists (Rd1/Rd2, 3y/12y experience), blinded to clinical and surgical data, individually elaborated free-text reports and, four months later, structured reports. Completeness (defined as description of six key anatomical sites deemed essential for surgical planning in a consensus of four-blinded external experts) and diagnostic performance (sensitivity and specificity) by site (histology as reference) were compared between reports using the McNemar test. The satisfaction of gynecologists was compared using the marginal homogeneity test.

Results

Structured reporting increased completeness for both Rd1 (rectosigmoid, retrocervical/uterosacral ligament, vagina, and ureter) and Rd2 (vagina, ureter, and bladder) (p < 0.05), without compromising sensitivity or specificity at any of the evaluated sites. Gynecologists’ satisfaction was superior with structured reports in most comparisons.

Conclusion

Structured MRI reports perform better in fully documenting essential features of PE and are similar in terms of diagnostic performance, therefore having higher potential for surgical planning. Gynecologists found them easier to assess and were more satisfied with the information provided by structured reports.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abrao MS, Gonçalves MO, Dias JA Jr, Podgaec S, Chamie LP, Blasbalg R (2007). Comparison between clinical examination, transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 22:3092-3097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bazot M, Bharwani N, Huchon C, Kinkel K, Cunha TM, Guerra A, et al (2017). European society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) guidelines: MR imaging of pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 27:2765-2775.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Coutinho A, Bittencourt LK, Pires CE, Junqueira F, Lima CMA de O, Coutinho E, et al (2011). MR imaging in deep pelvic endometriosis: A pictorial essay. Radiographics 231:549-567.

  4. Chamié LP, Blasbalg R, Ricar-do Mendes AP, Warmbrand G, Serafini PC (2011). Findings of pelvic endo-metriosis at transvaginal US, MR imaging, and laparoscopy. Radiographics 31:E77-100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alborzi S, Rasekhi A, Shomali Z, Madadi G, Alborzi M, Kazemi M, Hosseini Nohandani A (2018). Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging, transvaginal, and transrectal ultrasonography in deep infiltrating endometriosis. Medicine 97:e9536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Adamson GD, Kennedy S, Hummelshoj L (2010). Creating Solutions in Endometriosis: Global Collaboration through the World Endometriosis Research Foundation. Journal of Endometriosis 2(1):3-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nisolle M, Donnez J (1997). Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities. Fertil Steril 68:585–596.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cornillie FJ, Oosterlynck D, Lauweryns JM, Koninckx PR (1990). Deeply infiltrating pelvic endometriosis: Histology and clinical significance. Fertil Steril 53:978–983. 1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kinkel K, Chapron C, Balleyguier C, Fritel X, Dubuisson JB, Moreau JF (1999). Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 114:1080-1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bazot M, Daraï E (2017). Diagnosis of deep endometriosis: clinical examination, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and other techniques. Fertil Steril 108:886-894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moura APC, Ribeiro HSAA, Bernardo WM, Simões R, Torres US, D'Ippolito G, Bazot M, Ribeiro PAAG (2019). Accuracy of transvaginal sonography versus magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of rectosigmoid endometriosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 14:e0214842.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Feldman MK, VanBuren WM, Barnard H, Taffel MT, Kho RM (2020). Systematic interpretation and structured reporting for pelvic magnetic resonance imaging studies in patients with endometriosis: value added for improved patient care. Abdom Radiol (NY) 45:1608-1622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goncalves MO, Podgaec S, Dias JA Jr, Gonzalez M, Abrao MS (2010). Transvaginal ultrasonography with bowel preparation is able to predict the number of lesions and rectosigmoid layers affected in cases of deep endometriosis, defining surgical strategy. Hum Reprod 25:665-671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. European Society of Radiology (ESR). Good practice for radiological reporting. Guidelines from the European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2011). Insights Imaging 2:93–96.

  15. Kahn CE Jr, Langlotz CP, Burnside ES, Carrino JA, Channin DS, Hovsepian DM, Rubin DL (2009). Toward best practices in radiology reporting. Radiology 252:852-856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Marcovici PA, Taylor GA (2014). Journal Club: Structured radiology reports are more complete and more effective than unstructured reports. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:1265-1271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson AJ, Ying J, Swan JS, Williams LS, Applegate KE, Littenberg B (2004). Improving the quality of radiology reporting: a physician survey to define the target. J Am Coll Radiol 1:497-505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sistrom CL, Langlotz CP (2005). A framework for improving radiology reporting. J Am Coll Radiol 2:159-167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dunnick NR, Langlotz CP (2008). The radiology report of the future: a summary of the 2007 Intersociety Conference. J Am Coll Radiol 5:626–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR, Li Y, Hricak H (2011). Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology 260:174-181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Larson DB (2018). Strategies for Implementing a Standardized Structured Radiology Reporting Program. Radiographics 38:1705-1716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Agostini TCF, Figueiredo R, Warmbrand G, Torres US, Pria HRFD, D'Ippolito G (2020). Placental adhesion disorder: magnetic resonance imaging features and a proposal for a structured report. Radiol Bras 53:329-336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lopes PGM, Matsumoto CA, Lobo EJ, D'Ippolito G (2018). Proposal for a structured computed tomography report in the evaluation of pancreatic neoplasms based on expert opinions. Radiol Bras 51:95-101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jaramillo-Cardoso A, Shenoy-Bhangle A, Garces-Descovich A, Glickman J, King L, Mortele KJ (2020). Pelvic MRI in the diagnosis and staging of pelvic endometriosis: added value of structured reporting and expertise. Abdom Radiol (NY) 45:1623-1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mattos LA, Goncalves MO, Andres MP, Young SW, Feldman M, Abrão MS, Kho RM (2019). Structured Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reports for Patients with Suspected Endometriosis: Guide for Imagers and Clinicians. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 26:1016-1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Brook OR, Brook A, Vollmer CM, Kent TS, Sanchez N, Pedrosa I (2015). Structured reporting of multiphasic CT for pancreatic cancer: potential effect on staging and surgical planning. Radiology 274:464-472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Semaan HB, Bieszczad JE, Obri T, Aldinger PK, Bazerbashi MF, Al-Natour MS, Elgafy H (2015). Incidental Extraspinal Findings at Lumbar Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Retrospective Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:1436–1443.

  28. Lin E, Powell DK, Kagetsu NJ (2014). Efficacy of a checklist-style structured radiology reporting template in reducing resident misses on cervical spine computed tomography examinations. J Digit Imaging 27:588-593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Stillman AE, Rubin GD, Teague SD, White RD, Woodard PK, Larson PA (2008). Structured reporting: coronary CT angiography: a white paper from the American College of Radiology and the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 5:796-800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Alessandrino F, Cristiano L, Cinnante CM, Tartaglione T, Gerevini S, Verdolotti T, Colafati GS, Ghione E, Vitale R, Peverelli L, Brogna C, Berardinelli A, Moggio M, Mercuri EM, Pichiecchio A (2019). Value of structured reporting in neuromuscular disorders. Radiol Med 124:628-635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ganeshan D, Duong PT, Probyn L, Lenchik L, McArthur TA, Retrouvey M, Ghobadi EH, Desouches SL, Pastel D, Francis IR (2018). Structured Reporting in Radiology. Acad Radiol 25:66-73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Franconeri A, Fang J, Carney B, Justaniah A, Miller L, Hur HC, King LP, Alammari R, Faintuch S, Mortele KJ, Brook OR (2018). Structured vs narrative reporting of pelvic MRI for fibroids: clarity and impact on treatment planning. Eur Radiol 28:3009-3017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nörenberg D, Sommer WH, Thasler W, DʼHaese J, Rentsch M, Kolben T, Schreyer A, Rist C, Reiser M, Armbruster M (2017). Structured Reporting of Rectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Suspected Primary Rectal Cancer: Potential Benefits for Surgical Planning and Interdisciplinary Communication. Invest Radiol 52:232-239.

  34. Kambadakone AR, Zaheer A, Le O, Bhosale P, Meier J, Guimaraes AR, Shah Z, Hough DM, Mannelli L, Soloff E, Friedman A, Tamm E (2018). Multi-institutional survey on imaging practice patterns in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 43:245-252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ernst BP, Katzer F, Künzel J, Hodeib M, Strieth S, Eckrich J, Tattermusch A, Froelich MF, Matthias C, Sommer WH, Becker S (2019). Impact of structured reporting on developing head and neck ultrasound skills. BMC Med Educ 19:102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sluijter CE, van Lonkhuijzen LR, van Slooten HJ, Nagtegaal ID, Overbeek LI (2016). The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review. Virchows Arch 468:639-649.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Ederveen JC, Nienhuijs SW, Jol S, Robben SGF, Nederend J (2020). Structured CT reporting improves accuracy in diagnosing internal herniation after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Eur Radiol 30:3448-3454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. BP- A Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    Cinthia Callegari Barbisan, Marina Paula Andres, Lucas R. Torres, Bruna B. Libânio, Douglas J. Racy & Mauricio Simões Abrao

  2. Disciplina de Ginecologia, Departamento de Obstetrícia E Ginecologia, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua São Sebastião, 550, São Paulo, SP, 04708-001, Brazil

    Marina Paula Andres & Mauricio Simões Abrao

  3. Grupo Fleury, São Paulo, Brazil

    Lucas R. Torres, Ulysses S. Torres & Giuseppe D’Ippolito

  4. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    Ulysses S. Torres & Giuseppe D’Ippolito

Authors
  1. Cinthia Callegari Barbisan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marina Paula Andres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucas R. Torres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bruna B. Libânio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ulysses S. Torres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Giuseppe D’Ippolito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Douglas J. Racy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mauricio Simões Abrao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mauricio Simões Abrao.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barbisan, C.C., Andres, M.P., Torres, L.R. et al. Structured MRI reporting increases completeness of radiological reports and requesting physicians’ satisfaction in the diagnostic workup for pelvic endometriosis. Abdom Radiol 46, 3342–3353 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-02966-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-02966-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation