CT scan structured report for the study of abdominal wall defects: a fast, easy and practical tool at the service of both surgeons and radiologist

• Published in: Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery Vol. 25; no. 6; pp. 1685 - 1692
• Main Authors: Carrara, A., Nava, F. L., Costa, M., Fabris, L., Zuolo, M., Pellecchia, L., Moscatelli, P., Dorna, A., Calabrese, E., Ferrari, M., Paganelli, F., Recla, M., Tirone, G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Paris Springer Paris 01-12-2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Abdomen; Abdominal Surgery; Abdominal wall; Abdominal Wall - diagnostic imaging; Abdominal Wall - surgery; Computed tomography; Hernia; Herniorrhaphy; Humans; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Original Article; Radiologists; Surgeons; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods; Structured report; Abdominal wall defects; THT team
• ISSN: 1265-4906; 1248-9204
• DOI: 10.1007/s10029-021-02503-8

Purpose
The advantages offered by structured reporting have already been highlighted in the literature. However, there is still no evidence on the validity of this reporting method for the study of abdominal wall defects. This study aims to show the experience of the Trentino Hernia Team (THT) multidisciplinary group in the development and use of a structured CT scan report for the study of abdominal wall defects.
Methods
A regional multidisciplinary team (THT group) used a Delphi method to identify and select the most important CT scan parameters needed to describe and stage abdominal wall defects for correct preoperative planning. Based on the selected parameters, a CT scan structured report was worked out and collectively accepted. The first 20 structured reports obtained were individually tested for compilation speed and homogeneity of the data reported by five distinct radiologists. The reports were then evaluated by five different surgeons to test the simplicity of interpretation.
Results
We produced a model of a structured report for the study of the abdominal wall defects and tested it in our hospital network on the first 20 reports. The average completion time was 18 min (range 12–25). There was no heterogeneity among the reported data. The reports were analysed by five distinct surgeons to evaluate completeness and simplicity of interpretation. Each surgeon used a Likert scale from 0 to 5 to evaluate each report, producing average scores of 4.8 and 4.1 for completeness and comprehensibility respectively, with a mean combined total score of 8.9 out of 10.
Conclusions
Our structured report represents a fundamental tool capable of providing the surgeon with all the measurements of the parameters necessary for correct preoperative planning. At the same time, it is of crucial help for the radiologists representing an easy and fast way to report all the needed parameters using the same standards.