4.6 Article

Prostate Cancer Detection with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 1 versus Version 2

期刊

CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 129, 期 20, 页码 2451-2459

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.4103/0366-6999.191771

关键词

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Prostate; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 1; Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2

资金

  1. grant of National Natural Science Foundation of China [81171307]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) is a globally acceptable standardization for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis. The American College of Radiology revised the PI-RADS to address the limitations of version 1 in December 2014. This study aimed to determine whether the PI-RADS version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scoring system improves the diagnostic accuracy of mp-MRI of the prostate compared with PI-RADS v1. Methods: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board. A total of 401 consecutive patients, with clinically suspicious PCa undergoing 3.0 T mp-MRI (T2-weighted imaging + diffusion-weighted imaging + DCE) before transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy between June 2013 and July 2015, were included in the study. All patients were scored using the 5-point PI-RADS scoring system based on either PI-RADS v1 or v2. Receiver operating characteristics were calculated for statistical analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were compared using McNemar's test. Results: PCa was present in 150 of 401 (37.41%) patients. When we pooled data from both peripheral zone (PZ) and transition zone (TZ), the areas under the curve were 0.889 for PI-RADS v1 and 0.942 for v2 (P = 0.0001). Maximal accuracy was achieved with a score threshold of 4. At this threshold, in the PZ, similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were achieved with v1 and v2 (all P>0.05). In the TZ, sensitivity was higher for v2 than for v1 (96.36% vs. 76.36%, P = 0.003), specificity was similar for v2 and v1 (90.24% vs. 84.15%, P = 0.227), and accuracy was higher for v2 than for vi (92.70% vs. 81.02%, P = 0.002). Conclusions: Both v1 and v2 showed good diagnostic performance for the detection of PCa. However, in the TZ, the performance was better with v2 than with vl.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据