Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use

European Urology

Volumn 69, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 41-49

  Barentsz, Jelle O ^a   Weinreb, Jeffrey C ^b   Verma, Sadhna ^c   Thoeny, Harriet C ^d   Tempany, Clare M ^e   Shtern, Faina ^f   Padhani, Anwar R ^g   Margolis, Daniel ^h   Macura, Katarzyna J ⁱ   Haider, Masoom A ^j   Cornud, Francois ^k   Choyke, Peter L ^l  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

^d HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^f Department of Radiology   (United States)

^g MOUNT VERNON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^k UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^l NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MALE; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE IMAGING AND REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM VERSION 2; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TUMOR VOLUME; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND GUIDED FINE NEEDLE BIOPSY; NOMENCLATURE; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEM; STANDARDS;

ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND-GUIDED FINE NEEDLE ASPIRATION; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

EID: 84955656985     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.038     Document Type: Editorial

References (23)

1. J.J. Fütterer, A. Briganti, P. De Visschere, and et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging?. A systematic review of the literature Eur Urol 68 2015 1045 1053
2. I.G. Schoots, M.J. Roobol, D. Nieboer, C.H. Bangma, E.W. Steyerberg, and M.G. Hunink Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Eur Urol 68 2015 438 450
3. M.R. Pokorny, M. de Rooij, E. Duncan, and et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies Eur Urol 66 2014 22 29
4. V. Panebianco, F. Barchetti, A. Sciarra, and et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging vs. Standard care in men being evaluated for prostate cancer: a randomized study Urol Oncol 33 2015 17.e1-7
5. N.B. Delongchamps, M. Peyromaure, Schull, and et al. Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies J Urol 189 2013 493 499
6. M.M. Siddiqui, S. Rais-Bahrami, B. Turkbey, and et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer JAMA 313 2015 390 397
7. A. Heidenreich Consensus criteria for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer: not ready for routine use Eur Urol 59 2011 495 497
8. L. Dickinson, H.U. Ahmed, C. Allen, and et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting Eur Urol 59 2011 477 494 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.009 Epub 2010 Dec 21. PMID: 21195536
9. J.O. Barentsz, J. Richenberg, R. Clements, and et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Eur Radiol 22 2012 746 757
10. E.H. Hamoen, M. de Rooij, J.A. Witjes, J.O. Barentsz, and M.M. Rovers Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for prostate cancer detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: a diagnostic meta-analysis Eur Urol 67 2015 1112 1121
11. T.1 Vaché, F. Bratan, F. Mège-Lechevallier, S. Roche, M. Rabilloud, and O. Rouvière Characterization of prostate lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of three scoring systems in patients treated with radical prostatectomy Radiology 272 2014 446 455
12. PI-RADS™ Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System: 2015, version 2. American College of Radiology Web site. http://www.acr.org/∼/media/ACR/Documents/PDF/QualitySafety/Resources/PIRADS/PIRADS%20V2.pdf.
13. T. Wolters, M.J. Roobol, P.J. van Leeuwen, and et al. A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial J Urol 185 2011 121 125
14. J.P. Radtke, T.H. Kuru, S. Boxler, and et al. Comparative analysis of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy versus magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion guidance J Urol 193 2015 87 94
15. R. Renard-Penna, P. Mozer, F. Cornud, and et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System and Likert scoring system: multiparametric MR imaging validation study to screen patients for initial biopsy Radiology 275 2015 458 468
16. D. Portalez, P. Mozer, F. Cornud, and et al. Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients Eur Urol 62 2012 986 996
17. N.B. Delongchamps, A. Lefèvre, N. Bouazza, F. Beuvon, P. Legman, and F. Cornud Detection of significant prostate cancer with magnetic resonance targeted biopsies - should transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion guided biopsies alone be a standard of care? J Urol 193 2015 1198 1204
18. B.G. Muller, J.H. Shih, S. Sankineni, and et al. Prostate cancer: interobserver agreement and accuracy with the revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at multiparametric MR imaging Radiology 2015 142818
19. Malyarenko DI, Newitt D, J Wilmes L, et al. Demonstration of nonlinearity bias in the measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in multicenter trials. Magn Reson Med. In press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25754
20. A.R. Padhani, G. Liu, D.M. Koh, and et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations Neoplasia 11 2009 102 125
21. M. Abd-Alazeez, H.U. Ahmed, M. Arya, and et al. The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level - can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 32 2014 45.e17-22
22. M. Abd-Alazeez, A. Kirkham, H.U. Ahmed, and et al. Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies as the reference standard Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 17 2014 40 46
23. N.1 Arumainayagam, H.U. Ahmed, C.M. Moore, and et al. Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard Radiology 268 2013 761 769