Academic radiology · 2018
Automated Radiology-Pathology Module Correlation Using a Novel Report Matching Algorithm by Organ System.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dane Bari, Doshi Ankur, Gfytopoulos Soterios, Bhattacharji Priya, Recht Michael, Moore William
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE: Radiology-pathology correlation is time-consuming and is not feasible in most clinical settings, with the notable exception of breast imaging. The purpose of this study was to determine if an automated radiology-pathology report pairing system could accurately match radiology and pathology reports, thus creating a feedback loop allowing for more frequent and timely radiology-pathology correlation.
METHODS: An experienced radiologist created a matching matrix of radiology and pathology reports. These matching rules were then exported to a novel comprehensive radiology-pathology module. All distinct radiology-pathology pairings at our institution from January 1, 2016 to July 1, 2016 were included (n = 8999). The appropriateness of each radiology-pathology report pairing was scored as either "correlative" or "non-correlative." Pathology reports relating to anatomy imaged in the specific imaging study were deemed correlative, whereas pathology reports describing anatomy not imaged with the particular study were denoted non-correlative.
RESULTS: Overall, there was 88.3% correlation (accuracy) of the radiology and pathology reports (n = 8999). Subset analysis demonstrated that computed tomography (CT) abdomen/pelvis, CT head/neck/face, CT chest, musculoskeletal CT (excluding spine), mammography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) abdomen/pelvis, MRI brain, musculoskeletal MRI (excluding spine), breast MRI, positron emission tomography (PET), breast ultrasound, and head/neck ultrasound all demonstrated greater than 91% correlation. When further stratified by imaging modality, CT, MRI, mammography, and PET demonstrated excellent correlation (greater than 96.3%). Ultrasound and non-PET nuclear medicine studies demonstrated poorer correlation (80%).
CONCLUSION: There is excellent correlation of radiology imaging reports and appropriate pathology reports when matched by organ system. Rapid, appropriate radiology-pathology report pairings provide an excellent opportunity to close feedback loop to the interpreting radiologist.
METHODS: An experienced radiologist created a matching matrix of radiology and pathology reports. These matching rules were then exported to a novel comprehensive radiology-pathology module. All distinct radiology-pathology pairings at our institution from January 1, 2016 to July 1, 2016 were included (n = 8999). The appropriateness of each radiology-pathology report pairing was scored as either "correlative" or "non-correlative." Pathology reports relating to anatomy imaged in the specific imaging study were deemed correlative, whereas pathology reports describing anatomy not imaged with the particular study were denoted non-correlative.
RESULTS: Overall, there was 88.3% correlation (accuracy) of the radiology and pathology reports (n = 8999). Subset analysis demonstrated that computed tomography (CT) abdomen/pelvis, CT head/neck/face, CT chest, musculoskeletal CT (excluding spine), mammography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) abdomen/pelvis, MRI brain, musculoskeletal MRI (excluding spine), breast MRI, positron emission tomography (PET), breast ultrasound, and head/neck ultrasound all demonstrated greater than 91% correlation. When further stratified by imaging modality, CT, MRI, mammography, and PET demonstrated excellent correlation (greater than 96.3%). Ultrasound and non-PET nuclear medicine studies demonstrated poorer correlation (80%).
CONCLUSION: There is excellent correlation of radiology imaging reports and appropriate pathology reports when matched by organ system. Rapid, appropriate radiology-pathology report pairings provide an excellent opportunity to close feedback loop to the interpreting radiologist.