|
Title
|
|
|
|
Grading and characterization of soft tissue tumors on magnetic resonance imaging : the value of an expert second opinion report
| |
|
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| Objective To retrospectively compare the accuracy of the initial MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) report of referring radiologists and the second opinion report. Material and methods MRI of 155 patients presenting with a soft tissue tumor (STT) in a single large community center were referred for inclusion in the Belgian Soft Tissue Neoplasm Registry (BSTNR). The initial report and the second opinion report were made independently. Histopathology (gold standard) was obtained in 90 patients (group 1). In 65 patients, the diagnosis was made by the combination of clinical findings and/or follow-up (group 2). In group 1, the concordance in grading and tissue-specific (TS) diagnosis between the referring center (RC) and expert center (EC) was reviewed. Results In group 1, MR grading yields a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 89% in the EC. The sensitivity was 88% and the specificity 81% in the RC. The accuracy was significantly higher in the EC (92%) compared to the RC (83%) (p = 0.039). The TS diagnosis was correct in 50% versus 38.5% of malignant tumors and in 71.8% versus 51.6% of benign tumors in the EC and RC respectively. Conclusion A second opinion report increases the accuracy in the diagnosis of STT on MRI. |
| |
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
Insights into imaging / European Society of Radiology. - Berlin, 2010, currens
| |
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
Berlin
:
Springer
,
2012
| |
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
1869-4101
| |
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1007/S13244-012-0151-6
| |
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
3
:2
(2012)
, p. 131-138
| |
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Full text (open access)
|
|
|
|
| |
|