RESUMO
Background: There are multiple hematological and other entities (metastases, infections) that can affect the bone marrow (BM). The gold standard imaging technique for BM examination is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Technological advances have made it possible to digitalize image files and create applications that help to produce higher quality structured reports, facilitating the analysis of data and unifying the criteria collected, making it possible to fill an existing gap. The aim of this study is to present a structured report model applicable to BM studies by MRI. Methods: We have carried out a systematic review following the recommendations of the PRISMA checklist report to explore previous publications applying structured BM MRI reporting. Eligibility criteria: the selection of articles carried out by MeSH thesaurus. Original or review articles of BM pathology assessed by MRI. Our group with a wide experience in the evaluation of BM by MRI have designed a model for BM report using eight items: demographic data, diagnostic suspicion, technical data, type of exam initial or control, distribution and patterns involvement, complications and location, total assessment comments. Results: We have not found articles that reflect the existence of a structured report of BM examination by MRI. Only one descriptive article has been identified on guidelines for acquisition, interpretation and reporting which refers to a single entity. With the selected parameters, a software has been developed that allows to fill in the sections of the structured report with ease and immediacy and to send the result directly to the clinician. Discussion: Structured reports are the result of applying a logical structure to the radiological report, and the rules of elaboration comprise several criteria: (I) using a uniform language. The standardization of terminology avoids ambiguity in reporting and makes it easier to compare reports. (II) Accurately describe the radiological findings, following a prescribed order with review questions and answers. (III) Drafting using diagnostic screening tables. (IV) Respect the radiologists' workflow by facilitating the work and not hindering it. The final report of this work has been the product of the clinical-radiological collaboration in our working group.
