scholarly journals Interobserver agreement of Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS–v2)

Author(s):  
Hala Maher Ahmed ◽  
Ahmed Ebrahim Ebeed ◽  
Ahmed Hamdy ◽  
Mohamed Abou El-Ghar ◽  
Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek

Abstract Background A retrospective study was conducted on 71 consecutive patients with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) with a mean age of 56 years and underwent mp-MRI of the prostate at 3 Tesla MRI. Two readers recognized all prostatic lesions, and each lesion had a score according to Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS-v2). Purpose of the study To evaluate the interobserver agreement of PI-RADS-v2 in characterization of prostatic lesions using multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) at 3 Tesla MRI. Results The overall interobserver agreement of PI-RADS-v2 for both zones was excellent (k = 0.81, percent agreement = 94.9%). In the peripheral zone (PZ) lesions are the interobserver agreement for PI-RADS II (k = 0.78, percent agreement = 83.9%), PI-RADS III (k = 0.66, percent agreement = 91.3 %), PI-RADS IV (k = 0.69, percent agreement = 93.5%), and PI-RADS V (k = 0.91, percent agreement = 95.7 %). In the transitional zone (TZ) lesions are the interobserver agreement for PI-RADS I (k = 0.98, percent of agreement = 96%), PI-RADS II (k = 0.65, percent agreement = 96%), PI-RADS III (k = 0.65, percent agreement = 88%), PI-RADS IV (k = 0.83, percent agreement = 96%), and PI-RADS V (k = 0.82, percent agreement = 92%). Conclusion We concluded that PI-RADS-v2 is a reliable and a reproducible imaging modality for the characterization of prostatic lesions and detection of PCa.

2017 ◽  
Vol 209 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei S. Purysko ◽  
Leonardo K. Bittencourt ◽  
Jennifer A. Bullen ◽  
Thomaz R. Mostardeiro ◽  
Brian R. Herts ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margret Hund-Georgiadis ◽  
Olaf Ballaschke ◽  
Rainer Scheid ◽  
David G. Norris ◽  
D. Yves von Cramon

2017 ◽  
Vol 209 (6) ◽  
pp. W365-W373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satheesh Krishna ◽  
Matthew McInnes ◽  
Christopher Lim ◽  
Robert Lim ◽  
Shaheed W. Hakim ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
GÜLŞEN YÜCEL OĞUZDOĞAN ◽  
Zehra Hilal Adıbelli ◽  
Ertugrul Sefik ◽  
Hulya Mollamehmetoğlu ◽  
Ibrahim Halil Bozkurt ◽  
...  

Purpose: To evaluate the correlation between PI-RADSv2.1 and International Society of Urologic Pathologists (ISUP) score for patients who underwent multiparametric-MRI(MpMRI) prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided cognitive fusion biopsy (CF-Bx). And to investigate inter-observer agreement of PI-RADSv2.1. Methods: Patients who underwent MpMRI of prostate prior to first TRUS-guided CF-Bx, were included in this prospective study. MpMRI examinations were evaluated by two radiologists before biopsy according to the PI-RADSv2.1. Interobserver agreement was recorded and the final PI-RADS categorization was performed by consensus. Correlation of histopathological results with PI-RADSv2.1 score was evaluated. Lesions with Gleason Score(GS)≥6 were considered as prostate cancer (PCa). Results: A total of 84 patients with 106 lesions were included in the study. The ratio of PCa in the PI-RADS groups 1,2,3,4,5 was 0%, 0%, 22.2%, 56%, 94.45%, respectively. There was a positive correlation with a value of 0.814 between the PI-RADSv2.1 and the ISUP score. When PI-RADS≥3 is accepted as the cut-off value in peripheral zone(PZ) and the whole gland, the NPV for malignancy was 100.00%. For PI-RADS ≥4, it was 76.47% for PZ, and 80.65% for the whole gland. For the whole gland; sensitivity, specificity, and PPV of the PI-RADS≥3 were 100%, 12.9%, and 44.33%, respectively; for PI-RADS≥4, these values were 72.09%, 80.65%, and 72.09% respectively. Without applying cut-off values, the interobserver agreement for PI-RADS score was κappa:0.562. Conclusions: PI-RADSv2.1 was created in the framework of v2 to facilitate to evaluate MpMRI and to increase interobserver agreement. We believe that further studies will be necessary.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 52-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sahar M. ElKhamary ◽  
Alicia Galindo-Ferreiro ◽  
Laila AlGhafri ◽  
Rajiv Khandekar ◽  
Silvana Artioli Schellini

2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 211-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaojuan Li ◽  
Andrew Yu ◽  
Warapat Virayavanich ◽  
Susan M. Noworolski ◽  
Thomas M. Link ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document