Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42564594›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Impact of a Structured MRI Reporting Template on the Completeness of Primary Rectal Cancer Staging Reports: A Retrospective Audit.

Manish Kumar Jha, Shilpi Rani, Kashi Nath Sarkar, Shivani Sarkar, Manisha Sarkar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Manish Kumar JhaDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, JIS School of Medical Science & Research, Howrah, IND.
Shilpi RaniDepartment of Anatomy, Rama Medical College Hospital & Research Centre, Hapur, IND.
Kashi Nath SarkarDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, Balco Medical Centre, Vedanta Medical Research Foundation, Naya Raipur, IND.
Shivani SarkarDepartment of Oncopathology, Tata Medical Center, Kolkata, IND.
Manisha SarkarDepartment of Community Medicine, Bankura Sammilani Medical College and Hospital, Bankura, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHigh-resolution pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for local staging of primary rectal carcinoma and for communicating surgically relevant risk factors before multidisciplinary treatment planning. Free-text MRI reports may describe the primary tumor but may inconsistently document key management-relevant findings, including mesorectal fascia and circumferential resection margin status, depth of extramural spread, extramural vascular invasion, lateral pelvic lymph nodes, and low rectal sphincter complex involvement. This retrospective audit assessed whether use of a structured MRI reporting template was associated with improved completeness of primary rectal cancer staging reports.

methodsThis retrospective audit included 60 pelvic MRI reports performed for suspected or biopsy-proven primary rectal carcinoma at a tertiary care radiology department. Thirty consecutive reports prepared before template implementation were assigned to the free-text reporting group, and 30 reports prepared after template implementation were assigned to the structured reporting group. Reports were assessed using a predefined checklist of essential MRI staging elements, including tumor location, distance from the anal verge, craniocaudal tumor length, circumferential tumor position, relationship to the anorectal junction and anterior peritoneal reflection, MRI T category, depth of extramural spread, mesorectal fascia/circumferential resection margin status, extramural vascular invasion, mesorectal nodes, tumor deposits, lateral pelvic lymph nodes, sphincter complex involvement, levator ani involvement, adjacent organ invasion, and final MRI-based risk summary. The primary and only measured outcome was report completeness.

resultsThe mean completeness score was higher in the structured reporting group than in the free-text group, with mean scores of 91.3% and 58.6%, respectively. Structured reports showed more complete documentation of several clinically important staging domains that were inconsistently recorded in free-text reports, including mesorectal fascia/circumferential resection margin relationship, depth of extramural spread, extramural vascular invasion, lateral pelvic nodal assessment, and low rectal sphincter complex assessment. Structured reports also more frequently included a concise MRI-based risk summary integrating tumor level, T stage, nodal status, margin risk, extramural vascular invasion, and anticipated surgical relevance. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was performed; therefore, these findings should be interpreted descriptively rather than inferentially.

conclusionsImplementation of a structured MRI reporting template was associated with higher report completeness in this descriptive retrospective audit of primary rectal cancer staging reports. The structured template was associated with more complete documentation of clinically relevant reporting elements, particularly margin status, extramural spread, extramural vascular invasion, lateral pelvic nodes, and low rectal sphincter complex involvement. However, report completeness was the only measured outcome, and no formal statistical testing was performed. Further studies with statistical testing, reviewer blinding, and assessment of diagnostic accuracy or clinical outcomes are needed.

Indexed as

circumferential resection margin (crm)extramural venous invasionmri stagingquality improvement researchrectal cancerrectal mrireport completenessstructured reporting template

Identifiers

PMID42564594
PMCPMC13443989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.