RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the modality used for baseline assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and restaging after neoadjuvant treatment. The overall audited quality of MR imaging in large multicentre trials on rectal cancer is so far not routinely reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected MR images obtained within the Rectal Cancer And Pre-operative Induction Therapy Followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial and performed an audit of the technical features of image acquisition. The required MR sequences and slice thickness stated in the RAPIDO protocol were used as a reference. RESULTS: Out of 920 participants of the RAPIDO study, MR investigations of 668 and 623 patients in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, were collected. Of these, 304/668 (45.5%) and 328/623 (52.6%) MR images, respectively, fulfilled the technical quality criteria. The main reason for non-compliance was exceeding slice thickness 238/668, 35.6% in the baseline setting and 162/623, 26.0% in the restaging setting. In 166/668, 24.9% and 168/623, 27.0% MR images in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, one or more of the required pulse sequences were missing. CONCLUSION: Altogether, 49.0% of the MR images obtained within the RAPIDO trial fulfilled the image acquisition criteria required in the study protocol. High-quality MR imaging should be expected for the appropriate initial treatment and response evaluation of patients with LARC, and efforts should be made to maximise the quality of imaging in clinical trials and in clinical practice. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This audit highlights the importance of adherence to MR image acquisition criteria for rectal cancer, both in multicentre trials and in daily clinical practice. High-resolution images allow correct staging, treatment stratification and evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment. KEY POINTS: - Complying to MR acquisition guidelines in multicentre trials is challenging. - Neglection on MR acquisition criteria leads to poor staging and treatment. - MR acquisition guidelines should be followed in trials and clinical practice. - Researchers should consider mandatory audits prior to study initiation.
RESUMEN
AIM: This study aimed to validate the Rome III criteria and alarm symptoms with regard to their ability to discriminate between organic and functional diagnoses in children with gastrointestinal complaints. METHODS: We recruited 258 children aged four years to 17 years who consulted a paediatrician in secondary or tertiary care in Stockholm from January 2013 to May 2014 due to gastrointestinal complaints. A symptom questionnaire based on the official Questionnaire on Pediatric Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rome III, including questions on alarm symptoms, was used. A diagnostic review of their medical records was also carried out. RESULTS: The reference diagnoses were organic (16%), pain-predominant functional gastrointestinal disorders (54%) and other functional diseases (30%). When the reported symptoms that fulfilled the Rome III criteria for pain-predominant functional gastrointestinal disorders were combined with an absence of alarm symptoms, they had a high specificity (0.90) for a functional diagnosis, but a low sensitivity (0.15). Alarm symptoms were equally common in patients with organic (83%) and functional diseases (80%, p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Combining the Rome III criteria and an absence of alarm symptoms from patient questionnaires had high specificity but low sensitivity when diagnosing pain-predominant functional gastrointestinal disorders in children seeking medical care for gastrointestinal complaints.