The Relationship between PI-RADS Categories and Incidental Findings in Multiparametric Prostate MRI

Ediz, Suna Sahin; Gündüz, Nesrin

doi:10.29271/jcpsp.2021.09.1030

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In another study, Ediz and Gunduz [ 8 ] detected on secondary reading EPFs in 44 of 185 patients (48%) who underwent multiparametric prostate MRI. They identified inguinal hernias (28% of all patients), bladder wall abnormalities (16%), hydrocele (14%), and sigmoid diverticula (7%) as the most common EPFs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In comparison with the previously published literature on the prevalence of EPFs in patients undergoing prostate MRI, we additionally quantified the difference between the frequency of EPFs that were mentioned in the original report (a strategy used by Sherrer et al [ 7 ]) and that were found on secondary targeted reading [ 3 , 8 ]. Heterogeneity in reporting EPFs in primary reports has been recognized.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have reported the types and frequency of EPFs on prostate MRI with different imaging protocols, from primary reports or secondary readings, and in different age populations [ 3 , 7 , 8 ]. The frequency and spectrum of EPFs and the interpretation of their clinical relevance have been subject to variability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quantification and significance of extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI: a retrospective analysis and three-tier classification

Wagnerova,

Macova,

Hanus

et al. 2023

Insights Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To quantify extraprostatic findings (EPFs) on prostate MRI, estimate the proportion of reported and unreported EPFs, assess their clinical importance, and propose standardized reporting of EPFs. Materials and methods Prostate 3-T MRI studies, reports, and clinical data from 623 patients (age 67.9 ± 8.2 years) were retrospectively analyzed and re-evaluated for the presence of EPFs and their clinical significance: E1—no finding or findings that have no clinical significance; E2—potentially significant findings; and E3—significant findings. Results Secondary reading identified 1236 EPFs in 593 patients (1.98 ± 1.13 EPFs per patient, no EPFs in 30 patients), from which 468 (37.8%) were mentioned in the original report. The most common findings included diverticulosis (44% of patients), hydrocele (34%), inguinal fat hernia (16%), and bladder wall trabecular hypertrophy (15%). There were 80 (6.5%) E2 EPFs and 30 (2.4%) E3 EPFs. From E3 EPFs, 10 (33%) were not originally reported. A workup was suggested in 35 (52%) of the 67 originally reported E2 and E3 findings with follow-up and performed in 20 (30%). Fourteen (21%) EPFs in 11 patients influenced their management. Four experienced radiologists originally reported 1.8 to 2.5 findings per patient (p < 0.0001). Conclusions EPFs on prostate MRI are frequent, but only 2.4% are clinically significant (E3), and 33% of these are not reported. Only 30% of E2 and E3 findings are further explored, and 21% influence patient management. We suggest that an “E” category should be attached to the PI-RADS system to identify the presence of EPFs that require further workup. Critical relevance statement Extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI are frequent, but only 2.4% are clinically significant (E3), and 33% of these are not reported. We advocate standardized reporting of extraprostatic findings indicating their clinical significance. Key points • Extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI are frequent with an average of two findings per patient. • 2.4% of extraprostatic findings are significant, and 33% of these are not reported. • There is a significant variability among experienced radiologists in reporting extraprostatic findings. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantification and significance of extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI: a retrospective analysis and three-tier classification

Wagnerova,

Macova,

Hanus

et al. 2023

Insights Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the last decade, there has been growing attention on MRI of the prostate as new imaging toll, that thanks to the association of DWI and DCE with conventional T1and T2-W imaging, now it is possible to obtain a multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) protocols [28,30,[156][157][158][159][160][161][162][163].…”

Section: Prostate Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging in abdominal oncological setting: why and when

Granata

Fusco²,

Belli

et al. 2022

Infect Agents Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an overview of diffusion kurtosis (DKI) imaging in abdominal oncology. DKI allows for more data on tissue structures than the conventional diffusion model (DWI). However, DKI requires high quality images at b-values greater than 1000 s/mm2 and high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) that traditionally MRI systems are not able to acquire and therefore there are generally amplified anatomical distortions on the images due to less homogeneity of the field. Advances in both hardware and software on modern MRI scanners have currently enabled ultra-high b-value imaging and offered the ability to apply DKI to multiple extracranial sites. Previous studies have evaluated the ability of DKI to characterize and discriminate tumor grade compared to conventional DWI. Additionally, in several studies the DKI sequences used were based on planar echo (EPI) acquisition, which is susceptible to motion, metal and air artefacts and prone to low SNRs and distortions, leading to low quality images for some small lesions, which may affect the accuracy of the results. Another problem is the optimal b-value of DKI, which remains to be explored and not yet standardized, as well as the manual selection of the ROI, which could affect the accuracy of some parameters.

show abstract

The Relationship between PI-RADS Categories and Incidental Findings in Multiparametric Prostate MRI

Abstract: Objective: To find the frequency and significance of extraprostatic incidental findings (ep-IFs) during multiparametric-magnetic prostate resonance imaging (mp-MRI), and compare them with prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) outcomes. Study Design: Analytical study.

Cited by 2 publications

References 5 publications

Quantification and significance of extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI: a retrospective analysis and three-tier classification

Quantification and significance of extraprostatic findings on prostate MRI: a retrospective analysis and three-tier classification

Diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging in abdominal oncological setting: why and when

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About