1. Multidisciplinary Imaging Review Conference Improves Neuro-oncology Radiation Treatment Planning and Follow-up
- Author
-
Roi Dagan, Sukhwinder Johnny S Sandhu, Peter Fiester, Dinesh S. Rao, Ronny L Rotondo, Michael S. Rutenberg, Jeet Patel, and Adam L. Holtzman
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Neuroradiologist ,030204 cardiovascular system & hematology ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Multidisciplinary approach ,Medical imaging ,medicine ,Medical physics ,Radiation treatment planning ,skin and connective tissue diseases ,Radiation oncologist ,Neuroradiology ,business.industry ,Head and neck cancer ,General Engineering ,medicine.disease ,Quality Improvement ,Radiation therapy ,skull base tumor ,Radiation Oncology ,head and neck cancer ,sense organs ,business ,Radiology ,tumor boards ,030217 neurology & neurosurgery - Abstract
Purpose To review the impact of a weekly multidisciplinary neuroradiology imaging review on the management of patients undergoing radiotherapy. Methods A prospective study of the management of 118 patients (30=head and neck, 40=skull base, central nervous system=48) was conducted over a 12-month period from January 2018 through January 2019. After review of each patient's history and relevant imaging, a radiation oncologist completed a form detailing the changes that were made in diagnosis and management. Imaging source (external and internal examinations), availability of outside reports, report timeliness, the value of reports, changes in interpretation, changes in clinical management, and changes in prognosis were documented. Changes in interpretation and management were designated as major or minor depending on the significance of the change. The managing radiation oncologist indicated whether the imaging review conference substituted for a peer-to-peer consultation with a neuroradiologist. Results Nearly half (47%) of all patients had a change in interpretation. Of those, 32% of patients had a major change in interpretation, while 14% had a minor change in interpretation. The existence of the multidisciplinary imaging review conference prevented a peer-to-peer consultation (interruption) by the radiation oncologists to the neuroradiologists in 90% of the cases presented. Further analysis was performed. Conclusion The involvement of neuroradiologists in a joint radiation oncology imaging review conference resulted in changes in diagnostic imaging interpretation that led to significant changes in management, expected prognosis, and workflow.
- Published
- 2019