4.7 Article

Structured and shared CT radiological report of gastric cancer: a consensus proposal by the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) and the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM)

期刊

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 2, 页码 938-949

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08205-0

关键词

CT scan; Stomach neoplasms; Report

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Through multi-round consensus-building Delphi survey, the Italian SIRM and GIRCG promoted a shared discussion between skilled radiologists and surgical oncologists to develop a structured reporting template for CT of GC patients.
Objectives Written radiological report remains the most important means of communication between radiologist and referring medical/surgical doctor, even though CT reports are frequently just descriptive, unclear, and unstructured. The Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) promoted a critical shared discussion between 10 skilled radiologists and 10 surgical oncologists, by means of multi-round consensus-building Delphi survey, to develop a structured reporting template for CT of GC patients. Methods Twenty-four items were organized according to the broad categories of a structured report as suggested by the European Society of Radiology (clinical referral, technique, findings, conclusion, and advice) and grouped into three CT report sections depending on the diagnostic phase of the radiological assessment for the oncologic patient (staging, restaging, and follow-up). Results In the final round, 23 out of 24 items obtained agreement ( >= 8) and consensus ( <= 2) and 19 out 24 items obtained a good stability (p > 0.05). Conclusions The structured report obtained, shared by surgical and medical oncologists and radiologists, allows an appropriate, clearer, and focused CT report essential to high-quality patient care in GC, avoiding the exclusion of key radiological information useful for multidisciplinary decision-making.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据