Current controversies in TNM for the radiological staging of rectal cancer and how to deal with them: results of a global online survey and multidisciplinary expert consensus

Objectives: To identify the main problem areas in the applicability of the current TNM staging system (8th ed.) for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer and provide practice recommendations on how to handle them. Methods: A global case-based online survey was conducted including 41 image-based rectal cancer cases focusing on various items included in the TNM system. Cases reaching < 80% agreement among survey respondents were identified as problem areas and discussed among an international expert panel, including 5 radiologists, 6 colorectal surgeons, 4 radiation oncologists, and 3 pathologists. Results: Three hundred twenty-one respondents (from 32 countries) completed the survey. Sixteen problem areas were identified, related to cT staging in low-rectal cancers, definitions for cT4b and cM1a disease, definitions for mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement, evaluation of lymph nodes versus tumor deposits, and staging of lateral lymph nodes. The expert panel recommended strategies on how to handle these, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define MRF involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes. Conclusions: The recommendations derived from this global survey and expert panel discussion may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting. Key Points: • Via a case-based online survey (incl. 321 respondents from 32 countries), we identified 16 problem areas related to the applicability of the TNM staging system for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • A multidisciplinary panel of experts recommended strategies on how to handle these problem areas, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define mesorectal fascia involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes. • These recommendations may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting

Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting

OBJECTIVES: To update the 2012 ESGAR consensus guidelines on the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for clinical staging and restaging of rectal cancer. METHODS: Fourteen abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) participated in a consensus meeting, organised according to an adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Two independent (non-voting) Chairs facilitated the meeting. 246 items were scored (comprising 229 items from the previous 2012 consensus and 17 additional items) and classified as 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate' (defined by ≥ 80 % consensus) or uncertain (defined by < 80 % consensus). RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 226 (92 %) of items. From these recommendations regarding hardware, patient preparation, imaging sequences and acquisition, criteria for MR imaging evaluation and reporting structure were constructed. The main additions to the 2012 consensus include recommendations regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging, criteria for nodal staging and a recommended structured report template. CONCLUSIONS: These updated expert consensus recommendations should be used as clinical guidelines for primary staging and restaging of rectal cancer using MRI. KEY POINTS: • These guidelines present recommendations for staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • The guidelines were constructed through consensus amongst 14 pelvic imaging experts. • Consensus was reached by the experts for 92 % of the 246 items discussed. • Practical guidelines for nodal staging are proposed. • A structured reporting template is presented

Cognitieve revalidatie voor kinderen en jongeren met niet-aangeboren hersenletsel:wat zijn de effectieve componenten?

Veel kinderen en jongeren met niet-aangeboren hersenletsel (nah) ervaren problemen met cognitief functioneren, zoals een verminderd geheugen of slechtere concentratie. Dit artikel is gebaseerd op bevindingen en inzichten uit het proefschrift ‘executive functions of children and adolescents: novel perspectives on assessment and intervention’. Een belangrijk doel van het promotietraject was beter inzicht te krijgen in hoe we cognitieve functies en bijbehorende problemen bij kinderen en jongeren met nah kunnen verbeteren. Cognitieve problemen bij kinderen en jongeren kunnen mogelijk worden behandeld met cognitieve revalidatie. Interventies voor cognitieve revalidatie kunnen worden gecategoriseerd op basis van hun hoofdcomponenten: 1) strategiegebruik en/of metacognitie, 2) herhaald oefenen, en 3) externe hulpmiddelen. Resultaten van een literatuurstudie naar cognitieve revalidatie laten zien dat door interventies die zijn gebaseerd op metacognitie en/of strategiegebruik vooral adaptief gedrag en sociaal functioneren verbeteren. Interventies op basis van herhaald oefenen verbeterden de prestaties op taken die vergelijkbaar zijn met de geoefende taken. Multi-componenten-interventies die deze twee componenten combineren, leken te leiden tot verbeteringen in zowel cognitief als adaptief gedrag en sociaal functioneren. Externe hulpmiddelen verbeterden het functioneren in het specifieke gebied waarop het hulpmiddel was gericht, bijvoorbeeld het geheugen. De beschikbare gegevens suggereren dat interventies bestaande uit meerdere componenten, zoals een combinatie van metacognitie- en/of strategiegebruik en herhaald oefenen, veelbelovend zijn, omdat deze kunnen leiden tot verbeteringen in zowel het cognitieve als psychosociale functioneren van kinderen en adolescenten met nah

Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting

OBJECTIVES: To update the 2012 ESGAR consensus guidelines on the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for clinical staging and restaging of rectal cancer. METHODS: Fourteen abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) participated in a consensus meeting, organised according to an adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Two independent (non-voting) Chairs facilitated the meeting. 246 items were scored (comprising 229 items from the previous 2012 consensus and 17 additional items) and classified as 'appropriate' or 'inappropriate' (defined by ≥ 80 % consensus) or uncertain (defined by < 80 % consensus). RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 226 (92 %) of items. From these recommendations regarding hardware, patient preparation, imaging sequences and acquisition, criteria for MR imaging evaluation and reporting structure were constructed. The main additions to the 2012 consensus include recommendations regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging, criteria for nodal staging and a recommended structured report template. CONCLUSIONS: These updated expert consensus recommendations should be used as clinical guidelines for primary staging and restaging of rectal cancer using MRI. KEY POINTS: • These guidelines present recommendations for staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • The guidelines were constructed through consensus amongst 14 pelvic imaging experts. • Consensus was reached by the experts for 92 % of the 246 items discussed. • Practical guidelines for nodal staging are proposed. • A structured reporting template is presented

Current controversies in TNM for the radiological staging of rectal cancer and how to deal with them: results of a global online survey and multidisciplinary expert consensus

OBJECTIVES: To identify the main problem areas in the applicability of the current TNM staging system (8(th) ed.) for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer and provide practice recommendations on how to handle them. METHODS: A global case-based online survey was conducted including 41 image-based rectal cancer cases focusing on various items included in the TNM system. Cases reaching < 80% agreement among survey respondents were identified as problem areas and discussed among an international expert panel, including 5 radiologists, 6 colorectal surgeons, 4 radiation oncologists, and 3 pathologists. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-one respondents (from 32 countries) completed the survey. Sixteen problem areas were identified, related to cT staging in low-rectal cancers, definitions for cT4b and cM1a disease, definitions for mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement, evaluation of lymph nodes versus tumor deposits, and staging of lateral lymph nodes. The expert panel recommended strategies on how to handle these, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define MRF involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations derived from this global survey and expert panel discussion may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting. KEY POINTS: • Via a case-based online survey (incl. 321 respondents from 32 countries), we identified 16 problem areas related to the applicability of the TNM staging system for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • A multidisciplinary panel of experts recommended strategies on how to handle these problem areas, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define mesorectal fascia involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes. • These recommendations may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting

Magnetic resonance imaging for the clinical management of rectal cancer patients: recommendations from the 2012 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting.

OBJECTIVES: To develop guidelines describing a standardised approach regarding the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for clinical staging and restaging of rectal cancer. METHODS: A consensus meeting of 14 abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) was conducted following the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Two independent (non-voting) chairs facilitated the meeting. Two hundred and thirty-six items were scored by participants for appropriateness and classified subsequently as appropriate or inappropriate (defined by 65 80 % consensus) or uncertain (defined by < 80 % consensus). Items not reaching 80 % consensus were noted. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 88 % of items: recommendations regarding hardware, patient preparation, imaging sequences, angulation, criteria for MRI assessment and MRI reporting were constructed from these. CONCLUSIONS: These expert consensus recommendations can be used as clinical guidelines for primary staging and restaging of rectal cancer using MRI