% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Hinterberger:298608,
author = {A. Hinterberger and L. Trupka and S. Kortbein and R. Ebner
and N. Fink and M. F. Froelich and D. Nörenberg and C.
Wängler and B. Wängler and R. Schirrmacher and A.
Holzgreve and M. Brendel$^*$ and S. Corradini and C.
Auernhammer and J. Rübenthaler and F. Grawe},
title = {{S}tructured reporting of neuroendocrine tumors in
{PET}/{CT} using [18{F}]{S}i{TATE} - impact on
interdisciplinary communication.},
journal = {Scientific reports},
volume = {15},
number = {1},
issn = {2045-2322},
address = {[London]},
publisher = {Springer Nature},
reportid = {DKFZ-2025-00308},
pages = {4793},
year = {2025},
abstract = {Our retrospective single-center study aims to evaluate the
impact of structured reporting (SR) using a self-developed
template on report quality compared to free-text reporting
(FTR) in [18F]SiTATE Positron Emission Tomography/Computer
Tomography (PET/CT) for the primary staging and therapy
monitoring of patients diagnosed with neuroendocrine tumors
(NET). In total 50 patients were included. FTRs and SRs were
generated post-examination. All reports were evaluated by a
radiologist and a surgeon through a questionnaire to
determine their contribution to facilitating clinical
decision-making and to assess their completeness, linguistic
quality, and overall quality. SR significantly increased the
capacity of facilitating therapy decision-making from $32\%$
in FTR to $55\%$ in SR (p < 0.001). Trust in the report was
significantly higher in SR with a mean of 5.0 (SD = 0.5) vs.
4.7 (SD = 0.5) for FTR (p < 0.001). SR received
significantly higher mean ratings regarding linguistic
quality with 4.7 for SR vs. 4.4 for FTR (p = 0.004) and
overall report quality with a mean of 4.9 for SR vs. 4.6 for
FTR (p < 0.001). Concluding that SR enhances the overall
quality of reports in [18F]SiTATE-PET/CTs for NET staging,
serving as a tool to streamline clinical decision-making and
enhance interdisciplinary communication in the future.},
keywords = {Humans / Neuroendocrine Tumors: diagnostic imaging /
Neuroendocrine Tumors: pathology / Positron Emission
Tomography Computed Tomography: methods / Female / Male /
Middle Aged / Retrospective Studies / Aged / Adult /
Interdisciplinary Communication / Clinical Decision-Making /
Interdisciplinary communication (Other) / Neuroendocrine
tumor (Other) / PET/CT (Other) / Somatostatin receptor
(Other) / Structured reporting (Other)},
cin = {MU01},
ddc = {600},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)MU01-20160331},
pnm = {899 - ohne Topic (POF4-899)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-899},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:39922882},
doi = {10.1038/s41598-025-88999-x},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/298608},
}