Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Abdominal Radiology
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 12/2020

03.02.2020 | Special Section: Prostate cancer update

Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1

verfasst von: T. Ullrich, L. Schimmöller

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 12/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

In this article we take a critical look at the key changes of the newest edition of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 (v2.1) and indicate future directions for further development of the system.

Conclusion

PI-RADS v2.1 addresses some of the shortcomings of its widely embraced precursor version 2, largely to simplify interpretation and improve interobserver agreement without changing the fundamental acquisition and scoring guidelines. Biparametric MRI is acknowledged in the newest version, but multiparametric MRI including dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging is still recommended for most scenarios. Management recommendations and guidance on evaluation of follow-up MRI’s are still not included in the system.
Literatur
1.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. (2019) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 76(3):340–51CrossRef
2.
3.
Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2016) PI-RADS Prostate Imaging- Reporting and Data System: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRef
4.
Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, et al. (2017) Diagnostic Performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis. Eur Urol 72(2):177-188CrossRefPubMed
5.
Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D, et al. (2016) Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. Radiology 280(3):793-804CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, et al. (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Magnetic Resonance Imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology
7.
Spilseth B, Ghai S, Patel NU et al. (2018) A Comparison of Radiologists' and Urologists' Opinions Regarding Prostate MRI Reporting: Results From a Survey of Specialty Societies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(1):101-107CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hansen NL, Barrett T, Lloyd T et al. Optimising the number of cores for magnetic resonance imaging-guided targeted and systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2019 Jul 15. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bju.​14865. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 31306539.
9.
Rais-Bahrami S, Türkbey B, Rastinehad AR et al. (2014) Natural history of small index lesions suspicious for prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI: recommendations for interval imaging follow-up. Diagn Interv Radiol 20(4):293-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Ullrich T, Quentin M, Arsov C et al. (2018) Risk Stratification of Equivocal Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate. J Urol 199(3):691-698CrossRefPubMed
11.
Schoots IG (2018) MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions? Transl Androl Urol 7(1):70-82CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Liddell H, Jyoti R, Haxhimolla HZ (2015) mp-MRI Prostate Characterised PIRADS 3 Lesions are Associated with a Low Risk of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer - A Retrospective Review of 92 Biopsied PIRADS 3 Lesions. Curr Urol 8(2):96-100CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Washino S, Okochi T, Saito K et al. (2017) Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patients. BJU Int 119(2):225-233CrossRefPubMed
14.
Cucchiara V, Cooperberg MR, Dall'Era M, et al (2018) Genomic Markers in Prostate Cancer Decision Making. Eur Urol 73(4):572-582CrossRefPubMed
15.
Vourganti S, Rastinehad A, Yerram N, et al. (2012) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol 188:2152–2157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Distler FA, Radtke JP, Bonekamp D, et al. (2017) The value of PSA density in combination with PI-RADS for the accuracy of prostate cancer prediction. J Urol 198:575–582CrossRefPubMed
17.
Ma TM, Tosoian JJ, Schaeffer EM, et al. (2017) The role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy in active surveillance. Eur Urol 71:174–180CrossRefPubMed
18.
Muller BG, Kaushal A, Sankineni S, et al. (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion-assisted biopsy for the diagnosis of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 33:425.e421–425.e426CrossRef
19.
Tay KJ, Gupta RT, Holtz J, et al. (2017) Does mpMRI improve clinical criteria in selecting men with prostate cancer for active surveillance? Prostate Cancer Prostatic 20:323–327CrossRef
20.
Walton Diaz A, Shakir NA, George AK, et al. (2015) Use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Urol Oncol 33:202.e201–202.e207CrossRef
21.
Frye TP, George AK, Kilchevsky A, et al. (2017) Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound guided fusion biopsy to detect progression in patients with existing lesions on active surveillance for low and intermediate risk prostate cancer. J Urol 197(3): 640–646CrossRefPubMed
22.
Moore CM, Giganti F, Albertsen P et al. (2017) Reporting Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The PRECISE Recommendations-A Report of a European School of Oncology Task Force. Eur Urol 71: 648CrossRefPubMed
23.
Van der Leest M, Israël B, Cornel EB, et al. (2019) High Diagnostic Performance of Short Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocols for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-naïve Men: The Next Step in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Accessibility. Eur Urol 2838(19):30436-1
24.
Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, et al (2017) Validation of the Dominant Sequence Paradigm and Role of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Imaging in PI-RADS Version 2. Radiology 285(3):859-869CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
26.
Rosenkrantz AB, Babb JS, Taneja SS, et al. (2017) Proposed Adjustments to PI-RADS Version 2 Decision Rules: Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection. Radiology 283(1):119–129CrossRefPubMed
27.
Rosenkrantz AB, Oto A, Turkbey B, et al. (2016) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), Version 2: A Critical Look. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206(6):1179–1183CrossRefPubMed
28.
Ullrich T, Arsov C, Quentin M, et al. (2019) Analysis of PI-RADS 4 cases: Management recommendations for negatively biopsied patients. Eur J Radiol 113:1–6CrossRefPubMed
29.
Bakir B, Onay A, Vural M, et al. (2019) Can Extraprostatic Extension Be Predicted by Tumor-Capsule Contact Length in Prostate Cancer? Relationship With International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Groups. AJRAm J Roentgenol 31:1–9
30.
Xing NZ, Wang MS, Fu Q, et al. (2019) Feasibility of prostatectomy without prostate biopsy in the era of new imaging technology and minimally invasive techniques. World J Clin Cases 7(12):1403–1409CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Sackett J, Choyke PL, Turkbey B (2019) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for MRI of Prostate Cancer: Can We Do Better? AJR Am J Roentgenol 19:1–9
32.
Jordan EJ, Fiske C, Zagoria R, et al. (2018) PI-RADS v2 and ADC values: Is there room for improvement? Abdom Radiol 43:3109–3116CrossRef
33.
Shaish H, Kang SK, Rosenkrantz AB (2017) The utility of quantitative ADC values for differentiating high-risk from low-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Abdom Radiol 42:260–270CrossRef
34.
Chen T, Li M, Gu Y, et al. (2019) Prostate cancer differentiation and aggressiveness: Assessment with a radiomic-based model vs. PI-RADS v2. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:875–884CrossRefPubMed
35.
Greer MD, Lay N, Shih JH, et al. (2018) Computer-aided diagnosis prior to conventional interpretation of prostate mpMRI: An international multireader study. Eur Radiol 28:4407–4417CrossRefPubMed
36.
Othman AE, Falkner F, Weiss J, (2016). Effect of Temporal Resolution on Diagnostic Performance of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate. Invest Radiol 51(5):290-6CrossRefPubMed
37.
38.
Yu J, Fulcher AS, Winks SG, et al. (2017) Diagnosis of typical and atypical transition zone prostate cancer and its mimics at multiparametric prostate MRI. Br J Radiol 90(1073):20160693CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Schimmöller L, Blondin D, Arsov C et al. (2016) MRI-Guided In-Bore Biopsy: Differences Between Prostate Cancer Detection and Localization in Primary and Secondary Biopsy Settings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206(1):92-9CrossRefPubMed
40.
Gupta RT, Kauffman CR, Garcia-Reyes K et al. (2015) Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values of the Benign Central Zone of the Prostate: Comparison With Low- and High-Grade Prostate Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205(2):331-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Barrett T, Rajesh A, Rosenkrantz AB et al. (2019) PI-RADS version 2.1: one small step for prostate MRI. Clin Radiol 74(11):841-852
42.
Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, et al. (2012) Normal central zone of the prostate and central zone involvement by prostate cancer: clinical and MR imaging implications. Radiology 262(3):894e902
43.
Li Y, Mongan J, Behr SC et al. (2016) Beyond Prostate Adenocarcinoma: Expanding the Differential Diagnosis in Prostate Pathologic Conditions. Radiographics 36(4):1055-75CrossRefPubMed
44.
Valentin B, Blondin D, Ullrich T et al (2020) Can you trust the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in special cases? Rofo 192: 1-4CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Perspective: a critical assessment of PI-RADS 2.1
verfasst von
T. Ullrich
L. Schimmöller
Publikationsdatum
03.02.2020
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 12/2020
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02424-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2020

Abdominal Radiology 12/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Special Section: Prostate cancer

Comparison of PI-RADS version 2.1 and PI-RADS version 2 regarding interreader variability and diagnostic accuracy for transition zone prostate cancer

Editorial

Introduction to the special issue: Prostate Cancer Update

Pelvis

Impact of bowel preparation with Fleet’s™ enema on prostate MRI quality

Special section: Prostate cancer update

Tips to start an MR-US fusion biopsy program

Special Section: Prostate cancer update

Arguments against using an abbreviated or biparametric prostate MRI protocol

Pelvis

Prostatic peripheral zone thickness: what is normal on magnetic resonance imaging?

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

07.05.2024 Medizinstudium Nachrichten

Extreme Arbeitsverdichtung und kaum Supervision: Dr. Andrea Martini, Sprecherin des Bündnisses Junge Ärztinnen und Ärzte (BJÄ) über den Frust des ärztlichen Nachwuchses und die Vorteile des Rucksack-Modells.

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

IT für Ärzte Nachrichten

Darauf haben viele Praxen gewartet: Das Zi hat eine Liste von Praxisverwaltungssystemen veröffentlicht, die von Nutzern positiv bewertet werden. Eine gute Grundlage für wechselwillige Ärzte und Psychotherapeuten.

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise