PI-RADS 2.1对DWI缺失对前列腺病变评估的诊断意义。

Negar Firoozeh, Sung Yoon Park, Yaw Nyame, Arash Mahdavi, Seyed Ali Nabipoorashrafi, Achille Mileto, Bahar Mansoori, Antonio C Westphalen
{"title":"PI-RADS 2.1对DWI缺失对前列腺病变评估的诊断意义。","authors":"Negar Firoozeh, Sung Yoon Park, Yaw Nyame, Arash Mahdavi, Seyed Ali Nabipoorashrafi, Achille Mileto, Bahar Mansoori, Antonio C Westphalen","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores derived from a standard multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) protocol with those from a protocol consisting only of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced images (T2+DCE MRI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective, single-center, cross-sectional study approved by the IRB and compliant with HIPAA, 492 MRI exams performed in 2022 were analyzed. PI-RADS scores from mpMRIs were extracted from medical records, and new scores were generated for T2+DCE MRI following PI-RADS guidelines. Score differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's tests, stratified by lesion location (peripheral zone, PZ, and transition zone, TZ). Diagnostic accuracies of the two methods were compared using ROC curves, and logistic regression was employed to identify predictors of score changes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Notable differences in PI-RADS scores were observed were observed in the PZ (P = 0.03) and TZ (P < 0.001). 4.8 % of PZ and 4.0 % of TZ PI-RADS 3-5 lesions were misclassified as PI-RADS 1-2 on T2W+DCE MRI (PZ vs TZ, P = 0.64). However, ROC curve analyses revealed no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between mpMRI (Az = 0.77) and T2+DCE MRI (Az = 0.75, P = 0.07). PSA density was identified as a predictor of score changes from PI-RADS 3-5 to 1-2, although the effect size was modest.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although T2+DCE MRI yields different PI-RADS scores compared to mpMRI, the clinical impact on diagnostic accuracy and decision-making is overall small. This supports the continued use of T2+DCE MRI, particularly when diffusion-weighted imaging is compromised.</p>","PeriodicalId":93969,"journal":{"name":"Current problems in diagnostic radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic impact of DWI absence on prostate lesion assessment using PI-RADS 2.1.\",\"authors\":\"Negar Firoozeh, Sung Yoon Park, Yaw Nyame, Arash Mahdavi, Seyed Ali Nabipoorashrafi, Achille Mileto, Bahar Mansoori, Antonio C Westphalen\",\"doi\":\"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores derived from a standard multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) protocol with those from a protocol consisting only of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced images (T2+DCE MRI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective, single-center, cross-sectional study approved by the IRB and compliant with HIPAA, 492 MRI exams performed in 2022 were analyzed. PI-RADS scores from mpMRIs were extracted from medical records, and new scores were generated for T2+DCE MRI following PI-RADS guidelines. Score differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's tests, stratified by lesion location (peripheral zone, PZ, and transition zone, TZ). Diagnostic accuracies of the two methods were compared using ROC curves, and logistic regression was employed to identify predictors of score changes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Notable differences in PI-RADS scores were observed were observed in the PZ (P = 0.03) and TZ (P < 0.001). 4.8 % of PZ and 4.0 % of TZ PI-RADS 3-5 lesions were misclassified as PI-RADS 1-2 on T2W+DCE MRI (PZ vs TZ, P = 0.64). However, ROC curve analyses revealed no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between mpMRI (Az = 0.77) and T2+DCE MRI (Az = 0.75, P = 0.07). PSA density was identified as a predictor of score changes from PI-RADS 3-5 to 1-2, although the effect size was modest.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although T2+DCE MRI yields different PI-RADS scores compared to mpMRI, the clinical impact on diagnostic accuracy and decision-making is overall small. This supports the continued use of T2+DCE MRI, particularly when diffusion-weighted imaging is compromised.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93969,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current problems in diagnostic radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current problems in diagnostic radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current problems in diagnostic radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2025.03.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较标准多参数前列腺MRI (mpMRI)方案与仅由T2加权和动态对比增强图像(T2+DCE MRI)组成的方案得出的前列腺成像报告和数据系统(PI-RADS)评分。方法:在这项经IRB批准并符合HIPAA的回顾性、单中心、横断面研究中,分析了2022年进行的492次MRI检查。从医疗记录中提取mpmri的PI-RADS评分,并根据PI-RADS指南生成T2+DCE MRI的新评分。使用Wilcoxon符号秩和McNemar试验评估评分差异,并按病变位置(外周区,PZ和过渡区,TZ)分层。采用ROC曲线比较两种方法的诊断准确率,并采用logistic回归确定评分变化的预测因子。结果:PZ组PI-RADS评分差异有统计学意义(P = 0.03), TZ组差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。在T2W+DCE MRI上,4.8%的PZ和4.0%的TZ PI-RADS 3-5病变被误诊为PI-RADS 1-2 (PZ vs TZ, P = 0.64)。然而,ROC曲线分析显示mpMRI (Az = 0.77)与T2+DCE MRI (Az = 0.75, P = 0.07)的诊断准确率无显著差异。PSA密度被确定为PI-RADS评分从3-5到1-2变化的预测因子,尽管效应大小不大。结论:虽然T2+DCE MRI的PI-RADS评分与mpMRI不同,但临床对诊断准确性和决策的影响总体上较小。这支持继续使用T2+DCE MRI,特别是当弥散加权成像受损时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic impact of DWI absence on prostate lesion assessment using PI-RADS 2.1.

Objective: To compare Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores derived from a standard multiparametric prostate MRI (mpMRI) protocol with those from a protocol consisting only of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced images (T2+DCE MRI).

Methods: In this retrospective, single-center, cross-sectional study approved by the IRB and compliant with HIPAA, 492 MRI exams performed in 2022 were analyzed. PI-RADS scores from mpMRIs were extracted from medical records, and new scores were generated for T2+DCE MRI following PI-RADS guidelines. Score differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar's tests, stratified by lesion location (peripheral zone, PZ, and transition zone, TZ). Diagnostic accuracies of the two methods were compared using ROC curves, and logistic regression was employed to identify predictors of score changes.

Results: Notable differences in PI-RADS scores were observed were observed in the PZ (P = 0.03) and TZ (P < 0.001). 4.8 % of PZ and 4.0 % of TZ PI-RADS 3-5 lesions were misclassified as PI-RADS 1-2 on T2W+DCE MRI (PZ vs TZ, P = 0.64). However, ROC curve analyses revealed no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between mpMRI (Az = 0.77) and T2+DCE MRI (Az = 0.75, P = 0.07). PSA density was identified as a predictor of score changes from PI-RADS 3-5 to 1-2, although the effect size was modest.

Conclusions: Although T2+DCE MRI yields different PI-RADS scores compared to mpMRI, the clinical impact on diagnostic accuracy and decision-making is overall small. This supports the continued use of T2+DCE MRI, particularly when diffusion-weighted imaging is compromised.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信