Radiologists’ preferences regarding content of prostate MRI reports

a survey of the Society of Abdominal Radiology

Benjamin Spilseth, Daniel J. Margolis, Sangeet Ghai, Nayana U. Patel, Andrew B. Rosenkrantz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate radiologist preferences regarding specific content that warrants inclusion in prostate MRI reports. Methods: Sixty-one members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology responded to a 74-item survey regarding specific content warranted in prostate MRI reports, conducted in August 2016. Results: General items deemed essential report content by ≥ 50% of respondents were prostate volume (80%), extent of prostate hemorrhage (74%), TURP defects (69%), coil type (64%), BPH (61%), contrast dose (61%), contrast agent (59%), medications administered (59%), and magnet strength (54%). Details regarding lesion description deemed essential by ≥ 50% were overall PI-RADS category (88%), DCE (±) (82%), subjective degree of diffusion restriction (72%), T2WI intensity (72%), T2WI margins (65%), T2WI shape (52%), DWI 1-5 score (50%), and T2WI 1-5 score (50%). Details deemed essential to include in the report Impression by ≥ 50% of respondents were lymphadenopathy and metastases (100%), EPE (98%), SVI (98%), neurovascular bundle involvement (93%), index lesion location (93%), PI-RADS category of index lesion (82%), number of suspicious lesions (78%), significance of index lesion PI-RADS category (53%), and PI-RADS category of non-index lesions (52%). Preferred methods for lesion localization were slice/image number (68%), 3-part craniocaudal level (68%), zonal location (65%), anterior vs. posterior location (57%), and medial vs. lateral position (56%). Least preferred methods for localization were numeric sector from the PI-RADS sector map (8%), annotated screen capture (10%), and graphical schematic of PI-RADS sector map (11%). Conclusion: Radiologists generally deemed a high level of detail warranted in prostate MRI reports. The PI-RADS v2 sector map was disliked for lesion localization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1807-1812
Number of pages6
JournalAbdominal Radiology
Volume43
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Fingerprint

Radiology
Prostate
Transurethral Resection of Prostate
Magnets
Contrast Media
Surveys and Questionnaires
Radiologists
Hemorrhage
Neoplasm Metastasis

Keywords

  • Genitourinary
  • MRI
  • PI-RADS
  • Prostate
  • Reporting
  • Survey

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Cite this

Radiologists’ preferences regarding content of prostate MRI reports : a survey of the Society of Abdominal Radiology. / Spilseth, Benjamin; Margolis, Daniel J.; Ghai, Sangeet; Patel, Nayana U.; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.

In: Abdominal Radiology, Vol. 43, No. 7, 01.07.2018, p. 1807-1812.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Spilseth, Benjamin ; Margolis, Daniel J. ; Ghai, Sangeet ; Patel, Nayana U. ; Rosenkrantz, Andrew B. / Radiologists’ preferences regarding content of prostate MRI reports : a survey of the Society of Abdominal Radiology. In: Abdominal Radiology. 2018 ; Vol. 43, No. 7. pp. 1807-1812.
@article{af41892fb2c24e0992b1657aaf3f3b21,
title = "Radiologists’ preferences regarding content of prostate MRI reports: a survey of the Society of Abdominal Radiology",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate radiologist preferences regarding specific content that warrants inclusion in prostate MRI reports. Methods: Sixty-one members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology responded to a 74-item survey regarding specific content warranted in prostate MRI reports, conducted in August 2016. Results: General items deemed essential report content by ≥ 50{\%} of respondents were prostate volume (80{\%}), extent of prostate hemorrhage (74{\%}), TURP defects (69{\%}), coil type (64{\%}), BPH (61{\%}), contrast dose (61{\%}), contrast agent (59{\%}), medications administered (59{\%}), and magnet strength (54{\%}). Details regarding lesion description deemed essential by ≥ 50{\%} were overall PI-RADS category (88{\%}), DCE (±) (82{\%}), subjective degree of diffusion restriction (72{\%}), T2WI intensity (72{\%}), T2WI margins (65{\%}), T2WI shape (52{\%}), DWI 1-5 score (50{\%}), and T2WI 1-5 score (50{\%}). Details deemed essential to include in the report Impression by ≥ 50{\%} of respondents were lymphadenopathy and metastases (100{\%}), EPE (98{\%}), SVI (98{\%}), neurovascular bundle involvement (93{\%}), index lesion location (93{\%}), PI-RADS category of index lesion (82{\%}), number of suspicious lesions (78{\%}), significance of index lesion PI-RADS category (53{\%}), and PI-RADS category of non-index lesions (52{\%}). Preferred methods for lesion localization were slice/image number (68{\%}), 3-part craniocaudal level (68{\%}), zonal location (65{\%}), anterior vs. posterior location (57{\%}), and medial vs. lateral position (56{\%}). Least preferred methods for localization were numeric sector from the PI-RADS sector map (8{\%}), annotated screen capture (10{\%}), and graphical schematic of PI-RADS sector map (11{\%}). Conclusion: Radiologists generally deemed a high level of detail warranted in prostate MRI reports. The PI-RADS v2 sector map was disliked for lesion localization.",
keywords = "Genitourinary, MRI, PI-RADS, Prostate, Reporting, Survey",
author = "Benjamin Spilseth and Margolis, {Daniel J.} and Sangeet Ghai and Patel, {Nayana U.} and Rosenkrantz, {Andrew B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00261-017-1393-z",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "1807--1812",
journal = "Abdominal Radiology",
issn = "2366-004X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Radiologists’ preferences regarding content of prostate MRI reports

T2 - a survey of the Society of Abdominal Radiology

AU - Spilseth, Benjamin

AU - Margolis, Daniel J.

AU - Ghai, Sangeet

AU - Patel, Nayana U.

AU - Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate radiologist preferences regarding specific content that warrants inclusion in prostate MRI reports. Methods: Sixty-one members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology responded to a 74-item survey regarding specific content warranted in prostate MRI reports, conducted in August 2016. Results: General items deemed essential report content by ≥ 50% of respondents were prostate volume (80%), extent of prostate hemorrhage (74%), TURP defects (69%), coil type (64%), BPH (61%), contrast dose (61%), contrast agent (59%), medications administered (59%), and magnet strength (54%). Details regarding lesion description deemed essential by ≥ 50% were overall PI-RADS category (88%), DCE (±) (82%), subjective degree of diffusion restriction (72%), T2WI intensity (72%), T2WI margins (65%), T2WI shape (52%), DWI 1-5 score (50%), and T2WI 1-5 score (50%). Details deemed essential to include in the report Impression by ≥ 50% of respondents were lymphadenopathy and metastases (100%), EPE (98%), SVI (98%), neurovascular bundle involvement (93%), index lesion location (93%), PI-RADS category of index lesion (82%), number of suspicious lesions (78%), significance of index lesion PI-RADS category (53%), and PI-RADS category of non-index lesions (52%). Preferred methods for lesion localization were slice/image number (68%), 3-part craniocaudal level (68%), zonal location (65%), anterior vs. posterior location (57%), and medial vs. lateral position (56%). Least preferred methods for localization were numeric sector from the PI-RADS sector map (8%), annotated screen capture (10%), and graphical schematic of PI-RADS sector map (11%). Conclusion: Radiologists generally deemed a high level of detail warranted in prostate MRI reports. The PI-RADS v2 sector map was disliked for lesion localization.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate radiologist preferences regarding specific content that warrants inclusion in prostate MRI reports. Methods: Sixty-one members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology responded to a 74-item survey regarding specific content warranted in prostate MRI reports, conducted in August 2016. Results: General items deemed essential report content by ≥ 50% of respondents were prostate volume (80%), extent of prostate hemorrhage (74%), TURP defects (69%), coil type (64%), BPH (61%), contrast dose (61%), contrast agent (59%), medications administered (59%), and magnet strength (54%). Details regarding lesion description deemed essential by ≥ 50% were overall PI-RADS category (88%), DCE (±) (82%), subjective degree of diffusion restriction (72%), T2WI intensity (72%), T2WI margins (65%), T2WI shape (52%), DWI 1-5 score (50%), and T2WI 1-5 score (50%). Details deemed essential to include in the report Impression by ≥ 50% of respondents were lymphadenopathy and metastases (100%), EPE (98%), SVI (98%), neurovascular bundle involvement (93%), index lesion location (93%), PI-RADS category of index lesion (82%), number of suspicious lesions (78%), significance of index lesion PI-RADS category (53%), and PI-RADS category of non-index lesions (52%). Preferred methods for lesion localization were slice/image number (68%), 3-part craniocaudal level (68%), zonal location (65%), anterior vs. posterior location (57%), and medial vs. lateral position (56%). Least preferred methods for localization were numeric sector from the PI-RADS sector map (8%), annotated screen capture (10%), and graphical schematic of PI-RADS sector map (11%). Conclusion: Radiologists generally deemed a high level of detail warranted in prostate MRI reports. The PI-RADS v2 sector map was disliked for lesion localization.

KW - Genitourinary

KW - MRI

KW - PI-RADS

KW - Prostate

KW - Reporting

KW - Survey

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033465837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033465837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00261-017-1393-z

DO - 10.1007/s00261-017-1393-z

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 1807

EP - 1812

JO - Abdominal Radiology

JF - Abdominal Radiology

SN - 2366-004X

IS - 7

ER -