Cargando…

Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the value of second-opinion evaluation of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by subspecialised uroradiologists at a tertiary centre for the detection of significant cancer in transperineal fusion prostate biopsy. METHODS: Evaluation of prospectively...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hansen, Nienke L., Koo, Brendan C., Gallagher, Ferdia A., Warren, Anne Y., Doble, Andrew, Gnanapragasam, Vincent, Bratt, Ola, Kastner, Christof, Barrett, Tristan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5408042/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27778089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5
_version_ 1783232218880016384
author Hansen, Nienke L.
Koo, Brendan C.
Gallagher, Ferdia A.
Warren, Anne Y.
Doble, Andrew
Gnanapragasam, Vincent
Bratt, Ola
Kastner, Christof
Barrett, Tristan
author_facet Hansen, Nienke L.
Koo, Brendan C.
Gallagher, Ferdia A.
Warren, Anne Y.
Doble, Andrew
Gnanapragasam, Vincent
Bratt, Ola
Kastner, Christof
Barrett, Tristan
author_sort Hansen, Nienke L.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To investigate the value of second-opinion evaluation of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by subspecialised uroradiologists at a tertiary centre for the detection of significant cancer in transperineal fusion prostate biopsy. METHODS: Evaluation of prospectively acquired initial and second-opinion radiology reports of 158 patients who underwent MRI at regional hospitals prior to transperineal MR/untrasound fusion biopsy at a tertiary referral centre over a 3-year period. Gleason score (GS) 7-10 cancer, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive value (±95 % confidence intervals) were calculated and compared by Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS: Disagreement between initial and tertiary centre second-opinion reports was observed in 54 % of cases (86/158). MRIs had a higher NPV for GS 7-10 in tertiary centre reads compared to initial reports (0.89 ± 0.08 vs 0.72 ± 0.16; p = 0.04), and a higher PPV in the target area for all cancer (0.61 ± 0.12 vs 0.28 ± 0.10; p = 0.01) and GS 7-10 cancer (0.43 ± 0.12 vs 0.2 3 ± 0.09; p = 0.02). For equivocal suspicion, the PPV for GS 7-10 was 0.12 ± 0.11 for tertiary centre and 0.11 ± 0.09 for initial reads; p = 1.00. CONCLUSIONS: Second readings of prostate MRI by subspecialised uroradiologists at a tertiary centre significantly improved both NPV and PPV. Reporter experience may help to reduce overcalling and avoid overtargeting of lesions. KEY POINTS: • Multiparametric MRIs were more often called negative in subspecialist reads (41 % vs 20 %). • Second readings of prostate mpMRIs by subspecialist uroradiologists significantly improved NPV and PPV. • Reporter experience may reduce overcalling and avoid overtargeting of lesions. • Greater education and training of radiologists in prostate MRI interpretation is advised. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5408042
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54080422017-05-15 Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy Hansen, Nienke L. Koo, Brendan C. Gallagher, Ferdia A. Warren, Anne Y. Doble, Andrew Gnanapragasam, Vincent Bratt, Ola Kastner, Christof Barrett, Tristan Eur Radiol Urogenital OBJECTIVES: To investigate the value of second-opinion evaluation of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by subspecialised uroradiologists at a tertiary centre for the detection of significant cancer in transperineal fusion prostate biopsy. METHODS: Evaluation of prospectively acquired initial and second-opinion radiology reports of 158 patients who underwent MRI at regional hospitals prior to transperineal MR/untrasound fusion biopsy at a tertiary referral centre over a 3-year period. Gleason score (GS) 7-10 cancer, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive value (±95 % confidence intervals) were calculated and compared by Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS: Disagreement between initial and tertiary centre second-opinion reports was observed in 54 % of cases (86/158). MRIs had a higher NPV for GS 7-10 in tertiary centre reads compared to initial reports (0.89 ± 0.08 vs 0.72 ± 0.16; p = 0.04), and a higher PPV in the target area for all cancer (0.61 ± 0.12 vs 0.28 ± 0.10; p = 0.01) and GS 7-10 cancer (0.43 ± 0.12 vs 0.2 3 ± 0.09; p = 0.02). For equivocal suspicion, the PPV for GS 7-10 was 0.12 ± 0.11 for tertiary centre and 0.11 ± 0.09 for initial reads; p = 1.00. CONCLUSIONS: Second readings of prostate MRI by subspecialised uroradiologists at a tertiary centre significantly improved both NPV and PPV. Reporter experience may help to reduce overcalling and avoid overtargeting of lesions. KEY POINTS: • Multiparametric MRIs were more often called negative in subspecialist reads (41 % vs 20 %). • Second readings of prostate mpMRIs by subspecialist uroradiologists significantly improved NPV and PPV. • Reporter experience may reduce overcalling and avoid overtargeting of lesions. • Greater education and training of radiologists in prostate MRI interpretation is advised. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-10-24 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5408042/ /pubmed/27778089 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Urogenital
Hansen, Nienke L.
Koo, Brendan C.
Gallagher, Ferdia A.
Warren, Anne Y.
Doble, Andrew
Gnanapragasam, Vincent
Bratt, Ola
Kastner, Christof
Barrett, Tristan
Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title_full Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title_fullStr Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title_short Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
title_sort comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy
topic Urogenital
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5408042/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27778089
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5
work_keys_str_mv AT hansennienkel comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT koobrendanc comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT gallagherferdiaa comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT warrenanney comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT dobleandrew comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT gnanapragasamvincent comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT brattola comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT kastnerchristof comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy
AT barretttristan comparisonofinitialandtertiarycentresecondopinionreadsofmultiparametricmagneticresonanceimagingoftheprostatepriortorepeatbiopsy