Gennaro D'Anna, Lubdha Shah, Peter G Kranz, Joshua A Hirsch, M Khan, Michele Johnson, Antoine Feydy, J Nathan, L Manfre, Dan T Nguyen, Gordan Sze, Johan Van Goethem, Filip M Vanhoenacker
{"title":"ASNR/ASR/ESNR/ESSR“术语3.0”工作组对脊柱成像的国际调查结果。","authors":"Gennaro D'Anna, Lubdha Shah, Peter G Kranz, Joshua A Hirsch, M Khan, Michele Johnson, Antoine Feydy, J Nathan, L Manfre, Dan T Nguyen, Gordan Sze, Johan Van Goethem, Filip M Vanhoenacker","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1768247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our goal was to determine if \"Nomenclature 2.0,\" the classification of lumbar disk pathology consensus, should be updated. We conducted a social media and e-mail-based survey on preferences regarding the use of classification on magnetic resonance spine reporting. Members of the European Society of Neuroradiology, European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology, American Society of Neuroradiology, and American Society of Spine Radiology received a 15-question online survey between February and March 2022. A total of 600 responses were received from 63 countries. The largest number of responses came from Italy and the United States. We found that 71.28% of respondents used Nomenclature 2.0, Classification of Lumbar Disk Pathology. But classification on stenosis is used less often: 53.94% and 60% of respondents do not use any classification of spinal canal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, respectively. When queried about which part of Nomenclature needs improving, most respondents asked for a Structured Reporting Template (SRT), even though 58.85% of respondents do not currently use any template and 54% routinely use a clinical information questionnaire. These results highlight the importance of an updated Nomenclature 3.0 version that integrates the classifications of lumbar disk disease and spinal canal and foraminal stenosis. Further attention should also be directed toward developing a robust endorsed SRT.</p>","PeriodicalId":49545,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology","volume":"27 5","pages":"561-565"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Results of an International Survey on Spinal Imaging by the ASNR/ASSR/ESNR/ESSR \\\"Nomenclature 3.0\\\" Working Group.\",\"authors\":\"Gennaro D'Anna, Lubdha Shah, Peter G Kranz, Joshua A Hirsch, M Khan, Michele Johnson, Antoine Feydy, J Nathan, L Manfre, Dan T Nguyen, Gordan Sze, Johan Van Goethem, Filip M Vanhoenacker\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0043-1768247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Our goal was to determine if \\\"Nomenclature 2.0,\\\" the classification of lumbar disk pathology consensus, should be updated. We conducted a social media and e-mail-based survey on preferences regarding the use of classification on magnetic resonance spine reporting. Members of the European Society of Neuroradiology, European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology, American Society of Neuroradiology, and American Society of Spine Radiology received a 15-question online survey between February and March 2022. A total of 600 responses were received from 63 countries. The largest number of responses came from Italy and the United States. We found that 71.28% of respondents used Nomenclature 2.0, Classification of Lumbar Disk Pathology. But classification on stenosis is used less often: 53.94% and 60% of respondents do not use any classification of spinal canal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, respectively. When queried about which part of Nomenclature needs improving, most respondents asked for a Structured Reporting Template (SRT), even though 58.85% of respondents do not currently use any template and 54% routinely use a clinical information questionnaire. These results highlight the importance of an updated Nomenclature 3.0 version that integrates the classifications of lumbar disk disease and spinal canal and foraminal stenosis. Further attention should also be directed toward developing a robust endorsed SRT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49545,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"561-565\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1768247\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1768247","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Results of an International Survey on Spinal Imaging by the ASNR/ASSR/ESNR/ESSR "Nomenclature 3.0" Working Group.
Our goal was to determine if "Nomenclature 2.0," the classification of lumbar disk pathology consensus, should be updated. We conducted a social media and e-mail-based survey on preferences regarding the use of classification on magnetic resonance spine reporting. Members of the European Society of Neuroradiology, European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology, American Society of Neuroradiology, and American Society of Spine Radiology received a 15-question online survey between February and March 2022. A total of 600 responses were received from 63 countries. The largest number of responses came from Italy and the United States. We found that 71.28% of respondents used Nomenclature 2.0, Classification of Lumbar Disk Pathology. But classification on stenosis is used less often: 53.94% and 60% of respondents do not use any classification of spinal canal stenosis and foraminal stenosis, respectively. When queried about which part of Nomenclature needs improving, most respondents asked for a Structured Reporting Template (SRT), even though 58.85% of respondents do not currently use any template and 54% routinely use a clinical information questionnaire. These results highlight the importance of an updated Nomenclature 3.0 version that integrates the classifications of lumbar disk disease and spinal canal and foraminal stenosis. Further attention should also be directed toward developing a robust endorsed SRT.
期刊介绍:
Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology is a review journal that is devoted to musculoskeletal and associated imaging techniques. The journal''s topical issues encompass a broad spectrum of radiological imaging including body MRI imaging, cross sectional radiology, ultrasound and biomechanics. The journal also covers advanced imaging techniques of metabolic bone disease and other areas like the foot and ankle, wrist, spine and other extremities.
The journal''s content is suitable for both the practicing radiologist as well as residents in training.