| Abstract: |
Purpose: To study the practice patterns for performance and interpretation of CT/MRI imaging studies in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at multiple institutions using a survey-based assessment. Methods: In this study, abdominal radiologists/body imagers on the Society of Abdominal Radiology disease-focused panel for PDAC and from multiple institutions participated in an online survey. The survey was designed to investigate the imaging and reporting practice patterns for PDAC. The survey questionnaire addressed the experience of referring providers, choice of imaging modality for diagnosis and follow-up of PDAC, structured imaging templates utilization for PDAC, and experiences with the use of structured reports. Results: The response rate was 89.6% (43/48), with majority of the respondents working in a teaching hospital or academic research center (95.4%). While 86% of radiologists reported use of structured reporting templates in their practice, only 60.5% used standardized templates specific to PDAC. This lower percentage was despite most of them (77%) being aware of existence of PDAC-specific templates and recognizing their benefits, such as preference by referring providers (83%), improved uniformity (100%), and higher accuracy of reports (76.2%). The common impediments to the use of PDAC-specific templates were interference with efficient workflow (67.5%), lack of interest (52.5%), and complexity of existing templates (47.5%). With regards to imaging practice, 92.7% (n = 40/43) of respondents reported performing dynamic multiphasic pancreatic protocol CT for evaluation of patients with initial suspicion or staging of PDAC. Conclusion: Structured reporting templates for PDAC are not universally utilized in subspecialty abdominal/body imaging practices due to concerns of interference with efficient workflow and complexity of templates. Multiphasic pancreatic protocol CT is most frequently performed for evaluation of PDAC. © 2017, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. |
