{"paper_id":"d6181f3b-f6a6-4a3f-8f1c-4ba01c4327cd","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose\nMRI 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.\nMethods\nWe 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.\nResults\nStructured 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.\nConclusion\nStructured 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.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nAbrao 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.\nBazot 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.\nCoutinho 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.\nChamié 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.\nAlborzi 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.\nAdamson 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.\nNisolle M, Donnez J (1997). Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities. Fertil Steril 68:585–596.\nCornillie FJ, Oosterlynck D, Lauweryns JM, Koninckx PR (1990). Deeply infiltrating pelvic endometriosis: Histology and clinical significance. Fertil Steril 53:978–983. 1990\nKinkel K, Chapron C, Balleyguier C, Fritel X, Dubuisson JB, Moreau JF (1999). Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 114:1080-1086.\nBazot M, Daraï E (2017). Diagnosis of deep endometriosis: clinical examination, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and other techniques. Fertil Steril 108:886-894.\nMoura 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.\nFeldman 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.\nGoncalves 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.\nEuropean Society of Radiology (ESR). Good practice for radiological reporting. Guidelines from the European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2011). Insights Imaging 2:93–96.\nKahn 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.\nMarcovici 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.\nJohnson 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.\nSistrom CL, Langlotz CP (2005). A framework for improving radiology reporting. J Am Coll Radiol 2:159-167.\nDunnick NR, Langlotz CP (2008). The radiology report of the future: a summary of the 2007 Intersociety Conference. J Am Coll Radiol 5:626–629.\nSchwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR, Li Y, Hricak H (2011). Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology 260:174-181.\nLarson DB (2018). Strategies for Implementing a Standardized Structured Radiology Reporting Program. Radiographics 38:1705-1716.\nAgostini 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.\nLopes 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.\nJaramillo-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.\nMattos 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\nBrook 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.\nSemaan 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.\nLin 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.\nStillman 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.\nAlessandrino 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.\nGaneshan 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.\nFranconeri 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.\nNörenberg 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.\nKambadakone 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.\nErnst 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.\nSluijter 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.\nEderveen 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.\nFunding\nThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflicts of interest\nThere are no conflicts of interest to declare.\nAdditional information\nPublisher's Note\nSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nBarbisan, 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\nReceived:\nRevised:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nVersion of record:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-02966-4","source_license":"public-domain-us","license_restricted":false}