mpMRI对前列腺体积的评价:PI-RADS v2和PI-RADS v2.1推荐值的比较

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine
Elif Gündoğdu, Emre Emekli
{"title":"mpMRI对前列腺体积的评价:PI-RADS v2和PI-RADS v2.1推荐值的比较","authors":"Elif Gündoğdu,&nbsp;Emre Emekli","doi":"10.5152/dir.2020.20023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the prostate volumes calculated as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines, intraobserver and interobserver variability, and the agreement between the two measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prostate mpMRI examinations of 114 patients were evaluated retrospectively. T2-weighted sequences in the axial and sagittal planes were used for the measurement of the prostate volume. The measurements were performed by two independent observers as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines. Both observers conducted the measurements twice and the average values were obtained. In order to prevent bias, the observers carried out measurements at one-week intervals. In order to assess intraobserver variability, observers repeated the measurements again at one-week intervals. The prostate volume was calculated using the ellipsoid formula (W×H×L×0.52).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) revealed almost perfect agreement between the first and second observers for the measurements according to both PI-RADS v2 (0.93) and PI-RADS v2.1 (0.96) guidelines. The measurements were repeated by both observers. According to the ICC values, there was excellent agreement between the first and second measurements with respect to both PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 for first (0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and second observer (0.94 and 0.97, respectively). For both observers, the differences had a random, homogeneous distribution, and there was no clear relationship between the differences and mean values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ellipsoid formula is a reliable method for rapid assessment of prostate volume, with excellent intra- and interobserver agreement and no need for expert training. For the height measurement, the recommendations of the PIRADS v2.1 guideline seem to provide more consistently reproducible results.</p>","PeriodicalId":50582,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"15-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5152/dir.2020.20023","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of prostate volume in mpMRI: comparison of the recommendations of PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1.\",\"authors\":\"Elif Gündoğdu,&nbsp;Emre Emekli\",\"doi\":\"10.5152/dir.2020.20023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the prostate volumes calculated as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines, intraobserver and interobserver variability, and the agreement between the two measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prostate mpMRI examinations of 114 patients were evaluated retrospectively. T2-weighted sequences in the axial and sagittal planes were used for the measurement of the prostate volume. The measurements were performed by two independent observers as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines. Both observers conducted the measurements twice and the average values were obtained. In order to prevent bias, the observers carried out measurements at one-week intervals. In order to assess intraobserver variability, observers repeated the measurements again at one-week intervals. The prostate volume was calculated using the ellipsoid formula (W×H×L×0.52).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) revealed almost perfect agreement between the first and second observers for the measurements according to both PI-RADS v2 (0.93) and PI-RADS v2.1 (0.96) guidelines. The measurements were repeated by both observers. According to the ICC values, there was excellent agreement between the first and second measurements with respect to both PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 for first (0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and second observer (0.94 and 0.97, respectively). For both observers, the differences had a random, homogeneous distribution, and there was no clear relationship between the differences and mean values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ellipsoid formula is a reliable method for rapid assessment of prostate volume, with excellent intra- and interobserver agreement and no need for expert training. For the height measurement, the recommendations of the PIRADS v2.1 guideline seem to provide more consistently reproducible results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50582,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5152/dir.2020.20023\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2020.20023\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2020.20023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的:我们旨在评估PI-RADS v2和PI-RADS v2.1指南中推荐计算的前列腺体积,观察者内和观察者间的变异性,以及两种测量方法之间的一致性。方法:对114例前列腺mpMRI检查结果进行回顾性分析。轴位和矢状面t2加权序列用于测量前列腺体积。根据PI-RADS v2和PI-RADS v2.1指南的建议,由两名独立观察员进行测量。两位观测者都进行了两次测量,得到了平均值。为了防止偏差,观测者每隔一周进行一次测量。为了评估观察者内部的可变性,观察者每隔一周重复一次测量。前列腺体积计算采用椭球公式(W×H×L×0.52)。结果:类内相关系数(ICC)显示,根据PI-RADS v2(0.93)和PI-RADS v2.1(0.96)指南,第一和第二观察者之间的测量结果几乎完全一致。两位观测者重复了这些测量。根据ICC值,第一次和第二次测量对于第一次(分别为0.94和0.96)和第二个观察者(分别为0.94和0.97)的PI-RADS v2和PI-RADS v2.1都有极好的一致性。对于两个观察者来说,差异都是随机的、均匀的分布,差异与平均值之间没有明确的关系。结论:椭球公式是一种可靠的快速评估前列腺体积的方法,具有良好的观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性,无需专家培训。对于高度测量,PIRADS v2.1指南的建议似乎提供了更一致的可重复结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of prostate volume in mpMRI: comparison of the recommendations of PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1.

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate the prostate volumes calculated as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines, intraobserver and interobserver variability, and the agreement between the two measurement methods.

Methods: Prostate mpMRI examinations of 114 patients were evaluated retrospectively. T2-weighted sequences in the axial and sagittal planes were used for the measurement of the prostate volume. The measurements were performed by two independent observers as recommended in the PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 guidelines. Both observers conducted the measurements twice and the average values were obtained. In order to prevent bias, the observers carried out measurements at one-week intervals. In order to assess intraobserver variability, observers repeated the measurements again at one-week intervals. The prostate volume was calculated using the ellipsoid formula (W×H×L×0.52).

Results: Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) revealed almost perfect agreement between the first and second observers for the measurements according to both PI-RADS v2 (0.93) and PI-RADS v2.1 (0.96) guidelines. The measurements were repeated by both observers. According to the ICC values, there was excellent agreement between the first and second measurements with respect to both PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v2.1 for first (0.94 and 0.96, respectively) and second observer (0.94 and 0.97, respectively). For both observers, the differences had a random, homogeneous distribution, and there was no clear relationship between the differences and mean values.

Conclusion: The ellipsoid formula is a reliable method for rapid assessment of prostate volume, with excellent intra- and interobserver agreement and no need for expert training. For the height measurement, the recommendations of the PIRADS v2.1 guideline seem to provide more consistently reproducible results.

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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
69
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (Diagn Interv Radiol) is the open access, online-only official publication of Turkish Society of Radiology. It is published bimonthly and the journal’s publication language is English. The journal is a medium for original articles, reviews, pictorial essays, technical notes related to all fields of diagnostic and interventional radiology.
×
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