Comparison of multiparametric and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging protocols for prostate cancer diagnostics by radiologists with different experience

Yuriy A. Vasilev, O. Omelyanskaya, A. Vladzimirsky, P. Gelezhe, Roman V. Reshetnikov, A. Gonchar, Ivan A. Blokhin, Irina Kieva
{"title":"Comparison of multiparametric and biparametric magnetic resonance imaging protocols for prostate cancer diagnostics by radiologists with different experience","authors":"Yuriy A. Vasilev, O. Omelyanskaya, A. Vladzimirsky, P. Gelezhe, Roman V. Reshetnikov, A. Gonchar, Ivan A. Blokhin, Irina Kieva","doi":"10.17816/dd322816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: MRI can detect clinically significant prostate cancer, diagnose extracapsular extension and stage of the cancer. A scanning protocol including only T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted images represents a viable alternative to multiparametric MRI, provided that high diagnostic accuracy of the test is maintained. In recent studies, the diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI and mpMRI in detecting prostate cancer has demonstrated little difference. \nObjective: to compare the diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI and mpMRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using PI-RADS v2.1 with MRI-guided multifocal biopsy as the gold standard. \nMaterials and methods: this study is retrospective. We initially processed the medical records of 126 patients. Inclusion criteria were the presence of a PI-RADS 2.1 mpMRI, clinical information on free and bound PSA blood levels, a multifocal prostate biopsy performed, and a time interval between MRI and biopsy of no more than 14 days. Three investigators (radiologists with less than 2 years' experience, 2 to 5 years' experience, and more than 5 years' experience) independently evaluated bpMRI of the prostate for the presence of pathological foci. After a period of 2 weeks, the researchers evaluated the dataset of mpMRI of the prostate. Each lesion detected, starting from PI-RADS category 3, was compared with the result of a multifocal fusion biopsy. The biopsy result was presented as a sum of Gleason scores, with a Gleason score of 7 or higher being considered clinically relevant biopsy findings. Findings meeting PI-RADS criteria 4 and 5 were considered as tumor foci according to MRI data. \nConclusion: biparametric protocols of prostate MRI have a definite economic advantage over multiparametric protocols due to absence of costs for contrast media and significant decrease of MRI scanner loading time. Diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI to detect prostate foci is not inferior to mpMRI. At the same time, the use of DCE presumably allows reducing the number of biopsies.","PeriodicalId":34831,"journal":{"name":"Digital Diagnostics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17816/dd322816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: MRI can detect clinically significant prostate cancer, diagnose extracapsular extension and stage of the cancer. A scanning protocol including only T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted images represents a viable alternative to multiparametric MRI, provided that high diagnostic accuracy of the test is maintained. In recent studies, the diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI and mpMRI in detecting prostate cancer has demonstrated little difference. Objective: to compare the diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI and mpMRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using PI-RADS v2.1 with MRI-guided multifocal biopsy as the gold standard. Materials and methods: this study is retrospective. We initially processed the medical records of 126 patients. Inclusion criteria were the presence of a PI-RADS 2.1 mpMRI, clinical information on free and bound PSA blood levels, a multifocal prostate biopsy performed, and a time interval between MRI and biopsy of no more than 14 days. Three investigators (radiologists with less than 2 years' experience, 2 to 5 years' experience, and more than 5 years' experience) independently evaluated bpMRI of the prostate for the presence of pathological foci. After a period of 2 weeks, the researchers evaluated the dataset of mpMRI of the prostate. Each lesion detected, starting from PI-RADS category 3, was compared with the result of a multifocal fusion biopsy. The biopsy result was presented as a sum of Gleason scores, with a Gleason score of 7 or higher being considered clinically relevant biopsy findings. Findings meeting PI-RADS criteria 4 and 5 were considered as tumor foci according to MRI data. Conclusion: biparametric protocols of prostate MRI have a definite economic advantage over multiparametric protocols due to absence of costs for contrast media and significant decrease of MRI scanner loading time. Diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI to detect prostate foci is not inferior to mpMRI. At the same time, the use of DCE presumably allows reducing the number of biopsies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
具有不同经验的放射科医生对前列腺癌症诊断的多参数和双参数磁共振成像方案的比较
背景:MRI可以检测临床意义重大的前列腺癌症,诊断癌症的囊外延伸和分期。仅包括T2加权和扩散加权图像的扫描方案代表了多参数MRI的可行替代方案,前提是保持测试的高诊断准确性。在最近的研究中,bpMRI和mpMRI在检测前列腺癌症方面的诊断准确性几乎没有差异。目的:以PI-RADS v2.1和MRI引导的多焦点活检为金标准,比较bpMRI和mpMRI检测临床意义前列腺癌症的诊断准确性。材料与方法:本研究为回顾性研究。我们最初处理了126名患者的病历。纳入标准为PI-RADS 2.1 mpMRI的存在、游离和结合PSA血液水平的临床信息、进行的多灶前列腺活检以及MRI和活检之间的时间间隔不超过14天。三名研究人员(经验不足2年、2至5年和5年以上的放射科医生)独立评估前列腺的bpMRI是否存在病理病灶。两周后,研究人员对前列腺的mpMRI数据集进行了评估。从PI-RADS类别3开始,将检测到的每个病变与多焦点融合活检的结果进行比较。活检结果以格里森评分的总和表示,格里森评分为7或更高被认为是临床相关的活检结果。根据MRI数据,符合PI-RADS标准4和5的结果被视为肿瘤病灶。结论:与多参数方案相比,前列腺MRI的双参数方案具有一定的经济优势,因为它不需要造影剂的成本,并且显著缩短了MRI扫描仪的加载时间。bpMRI检测前列腺病灶的诊断准确性并不低于mpMRI。同时,DCE的使用可能会减少活检次数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊最新文献
A new AI program for the automatic evaluation of scoliosis on frontal spinal radiographs: Accuracy, pros and cons. Conventional and innovative imaging modalities in Bladder Cancer: techniques and applications Possibilities and limitations of MRI diagnostics of endocervical adenocarcinomas of the cervix. An unknown situs viscerum inversus totalis, accidentally discovered after a CT scan The Role of Teleradiology in Interpretation of Ultrasounds Performed in the Emergency Setting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1