Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 May 17;26(144):170002.
doi: 10.1183/16000617.0002-2017. Print 2017 Jun 30.

Multidisciplinary evaluation of interstitial lung diseases: current insights: Number 1 in the Series "Radiology" Edited by Nicola Sverzellati and Sujal Desai

Affiliations
Review

Multidisciplinary evaluation of interstitial lung diseases: current insights: Number 1 in the Series "Radiology" Edited by Nicola Sverzellati and Sujal Desai

Simon L F Walsh. Eur Respir Rev. .

Abstract

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) diagnosis is regarded as the diagnostic reference standard for interstitial lung disease (ILD). Several studies have reported that MDT diagnosis is associated with higher levels of diagnostic confidence and better interobserver agreement when compared to the individual components of the MDT in isolation. Although this recommendation is widely accepted, no guideline statement specifies what constitutes an MDT meeting and how its participants should govern it. Furthermore, the precise role of an MDT meeting in the setting of ILD may vary from one group to another. For example, in some cases, the meeting will confine its discussion to characterising the disease and formulating diagnosis. In others, management decisions may also be part of the discussion. Surprisingly, there is no consensus on how MDT diagnosis is validated. As multidisciplinary evaluation contains all the available clinical information on an individual patient, there is no reference standard against which the veracity of MDT diagnosis can be tested. Finally, many of these uncertainties surrounding MDT meeting practice are unlikely to be answered by traditional evidence-based studies, which create difficulties when generating guideline recommendations. There is clearly a need for expert consensus on what constitutes acceptable MDT meeting practice. This consensus will need to be flexible to accommodate the variability in resources available to fledgling MDT groups and the variable nature of patients requiring discussion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: None declared.

Comment in

References

    1. American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society. American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society international multidisciplinary consensus classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002; 165: 277–304. - PubMed
    1. Travis WD, Costabel U, Hansell DM, et al. . An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: update of the international multidisciplinary classification of the idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013; 188: 733–748. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Flaherty KR, King TE Jr, Raghu G, et al. . Idiopathic interstitial pneumonia: what is the effect of a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004; 170: 904–910. - PubMed
    1. Thomeer M, Demedts M, Behr J, et al. . Multidisciplinary interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Eur Respir J 2008; 31: 585–591. - PubMed
    1. Aziz ZA, Wells AU, Hansell DM, et al. . HRCT diagnosis of diffuse parenchymal lung disease: inter-observer variation. Thorax 2004; 59: 506–511. - PMC - PubMed