Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer based on the PI-RADS: an interobserver study
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6702.2018.12.009
- VernacularTitle:不同专业影像医生采用PI-RADS评分诊断有临床意义前列腺癌的差异性研究
- Author:
Nan LUO
1
;
Kai ZHANG
;
Hongbo LI
;
Zhanming FAN
;
Gang ZHU
Author Information
1. 100029,首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院医学影像科
- Keywords:
Prostatic neoplasms;
Prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS);
Magnetic resonance imaging;
Targeted biopsy;
Radiologist
- From:
Chinese Journal of Urology
2018;39(12):922-925
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer by general radiologist and uroradiology specialist based on the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS).Methods A total of 45 men from Beijing United Family Hospital and Clinics undergoing prostate mpMRI examination and subsequent MRI-targeted biopsy were included in the study.The age of patients was (60.0 ± 8.0) years,the median PSA level was 7.2 ng/ml (1.2-95.8 ng/ml) and the median prostate volume was 45.0 ml (18.3-127.0 ml).The general radiologists from Beijing United Family Hospital and Clinics made the diagnosis according to PI-RADS 2.0.One uroradiology specialist from Beijing Anzhen hospital reviewed all the mpMRIs retrospectively and marked new PI-RADS score based on PI-RADS 2.0.The PI-RADS ≥ 3 lesion was recognized as suspicious of clinically significant prostate cancer.The distribution of PI-RADS score from different doctors and the diagnostic accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer was compared.Results All the 45 patients underwent MRI-targeted cognitive biopsy and 14 cases of prostate cancer were detected,including 9 cases of clinically significant prostate cancer.There was no significant difference in the distribution of PI-RADS by general radiologist and uroradiology specialist (P =0.064).82.8％ (37/45) and 37.8％ (17/45) patients were diagnosed with PI-RADS ≥ 3 by general radiologist and uroradiology specialist respectively.The interobserver agreement was only 17.8％ (8/45).The positive predictive value of PI-RADS≥3 was 35.1％ (13/37) and 76.5％ (13/17) for prostate cancer by general radiologist and uroradiology specialist respectively,and for clinically significant prostate cancer,the positive predictive value of PI-RADS ≥ 3 was 21.6％ (8/37) and 52.9％ (9/17) respectively.Conclusions Uroradiology specialist achieved significantly superior in predictive value of PI-RADS for clinically significant prostate cancer compared with general radiologist.In the experienced centers,MRI-targeted biopsy could be performed only on high PI-RADS score lesions,thus to reduce unnecessary biopsies and to avoid over diagnosis and over treatment of prostate cancer.
