• European radiology · Jun 2020

    Interreader variability in prostate MRI reporting using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1.

    • Giorgio Brembilla, Paolo Dell'Oglio, Armando Stabile, Anna Damascelli, Lisa Brunetti, Silvia Ravelli, Giulia Cristel, Elena Schiani, Elena Venturini, Daniele Grippaldi, Vincenzo Mendola, RancoitaPaola Maria VittoriaPMVUniversity Centre for Statistics in the Biomedical Sciences (CUSSB), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy., Antonio Esposito, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi, Alessandro Del Maschio, and Francesco De Cobelli.
    • Department of Radiology, Centre for Experimental Imaging, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. brembilla.giorgio@hsr.it.
    • Eur Radiol. 2020 Jun 1; 30 (6): 3383-3392.

    ObjectivesTo evaluate the agreement among readers with different expertise in detecting suspicious lesions at prostate multiparametric MRI using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1.MethodsWe evaluated 200 consecutive biopsy-naïve or previously negative biopsy men who underwent MRI for clinically suspected prostate cancer (PCa) between May and September 2017. Of them, 132 patients underwent prostate biopsy. Seven radiologists (four dedicated uro-radiologists and three non-dedicated abdominal radiologists) reviewed and scored all MRI examinations according to PI-RADS v2.1. Agreement on index lesion detection was evaluated with Conger's k coefficient, agreement coefficient 1 (AC1), percentage of agreement (PA), and indexes of specific positive and negative agreement. Clinical and radiological features that may influence variability were evaluated.ResultsAgreement in index lesion detection among all readers was substantial (AC1 0.738; 95% CI 0.695-0.782); dedicated radiologists showed higher agreement compared with non-dedicated readers. Clinical and radiological parameters that positively influenced agreement were PSA density ≥ 0.15 ng/mL/cc, pre-MRI high risk for PCa, positivity threshold of PI-RADS score 4 + 5, PZ lesions, homogeneous signal intensity of the PZ, and subjectively easy interpretation of MRI. Positive specific agreement was significantly higher among dedicated readers, up to 93.4% (95% CI 90.7-95.4) in patients harboring csPCa. Agreement on absence of lesions was excellent for both dedicated and non-dedicated readers (respectively 85.1% [95% CI 78.4-92.3] and 82.0% [95% CI 77.2-90.1]).ConclusionsAgreement on index lesion detection among radiologists of various experiences is substantial to excellent using PI-RADS v2.1. Concordance on absence of lesions is excellent across readers' experience.Key Points• Agreement on index lesion detection among radiologists of various experiences is substantial to excellent using PI-RADS v2.1. • Concordance between experienced readers is higher than between less-experienced readers. • Concordance on absence of lesions is excellent across readers' experience.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.