Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Comparison between conventional and structured magnetic resonance imaging reports in perianal fistula

Comparação entre laudo convencional e estruturado de ressonância magnética na fístula perianal

Abstract

Rationale

Very often magnetic resonance imaging is used in the study of complex anal fistulae, but conventional reports may contribute little to what really matters to the coloproctologist.

Objective

To compare the clarity and usefulness of the conventional report compared to structured magnetic resonance imaging in cases of anal fistula.

Method

30 magnetic resonance exams already performed with an evaluation of anal fistula were again evaluated without the radiologist having access to the old report and a new structured report was prepared. Five proctologists evaluated the 30 conventional and 30 structured reports and answered questionnaires with eight questions comparing their practical aspects. The results were tabulated and submitted to statistical treatment considering a significant p < 0.05.

Results

There was a statistically significant difference in favor of the structured report in the questions “clearly defines whether it is an active fistula or fibrosis”, “clearly states whether the tract is single or multiple”, “whether the patient has anal fistula or not”. The other questions did not present differences between the groups.

Conclusion

The structured magnetic resonance report presented clearer information and was better evaluated in relation to the conventional one in the analysis of proctologists in the study of anal fistulae.

Keywords:
Rectal fistula; Magnetic resonance imaging; Diagnosis; Radiology; Therapeutics

Sociedade Brasileira de Coloproctologia Av. Marechal Câmara, 160/916, 20020-080 Rio de Janeiro/RJ Brasil, Tel.: (55 21) 2240-8927, Fax: (55 21) 2220-5803 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: sbcp@sbcp.org.br