Background
The performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretation and communication of findings and its implication on treatment decisions has not fully been explored in rectal cancer.
Purpose
To investigate in a region the adherence to MRI protocol standards and the relation between MRI interpretation and selection to preoperative therapy in rectal cancer.
Material and Methods
Data on consecutive patients who underwent elective rectal cancer surgery in the region from January to June 2010 were obtained from the National Colorectal Cancer Registry. Pretherapeutic MRI images were re-evaluated. Agreement between the original reports and the re-evaluation was compared using Cohen’s kappa coefficient.
Results
Among the 94 patients included, 81 (86%) had pretherapeutic MRI in accordance with defined imaging guidelines. In 34% of the original MR reports, data on extramural venous invasion (mrEMVI) and mrT category were not reported. Complete tumor staging was not possible because of missing data in 33 (35%) of the patients. The agreement between the original MR reports and the re-evaluation regarding tumor stage was moderate (κ = 0.48). For decided treatment compared to recommended preoperative treatment according to the re-evaluation, the agreement was fair (κ = 0.33).
Conclusion
Established MRI protocol standards were not universally applied. Missing data and inadequacies in original MRI reports resulted in moderate agreement between the original report and the re-evaluation indicating a risk of inappropriate treatment selection. The results call for further educational efforts in rectal cancer MRI acquisition and repeated audits of image protocol adherence and interpretation quality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.