Cargando…

The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment

Background. Standardised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines for the assessment of prostate alterations were designed for the assessment of prostate pathology. Published by the ESUR in 2012, PI-RADS v1 was based on the total score of different MRI sequences with subsequen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aliukonis, Paulius, Letauta, Tadas, Briedienė, Rūta, Naruševičiūtė, Ieva, Letautienė, Simona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Publishers 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5467962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28630592
http://dx.doi.org/10.6001/actamedica.v24i1.3462
_version_ 1783243352304517120
author Aliukonis, Paulius
Letauta, Tadas
Briedienė, Rūta
Naruševičiūtė, Ieva
Letautienė, Simona
author_facet Aliukonis, Paulius
Letauta, Tadas
Briedienė, Rūta
Naruševičiūtė, Ieva
Letautienė, Simona
author_sort Aliukonis, Paulius
collection PubMed
description Background. Standardised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines for the assessment of prostate alterations were designed for the assessment of prostate pathology. Published by the ESUR in 2012, PI-RADS v1 was based on the total score of different MRI sequences with subsequent calculation. PI-RADS v2 was published by the American College of Radiology in 2015 and featured different assessment criteria for prostate peripheral and transitory zones. Aim. To assess the correlations of PI-RADS v1 and PI-RADS v2 with Gleason score values and to define their predictive values of the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of 66 patients. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) value and the Gleason score (GS) were assessed. One the most malignant focal lesion was selected in the peripheral zone of each lobe of the prostate (91 in total). Statistical analysis was carried out applying SPSS software, v.23, p < 0.05. Results. Focal lesions assessed by PI-RADS v1 score: 10% – 1, 12% – 2, 41% – 3, 23% – 4, 14% – 5. Assessment applying PI-RADS v.2: 20% – 1, 7.5% – 2, 26%, 29.5%, and 17% were assessed by 3, 4, and 5 scores. Statistically relevant correlation was found only between GS and PI-RADS (p = 0.033). The positive predictive value of both versions of PI-RADS – 75%, negative predictive value of PI-RADS v1 – 46%, PI-RADS v2 – 43%. Conclusions. PI-RADS v1 was more statistically relevant in assessing the grade of tumour. Prediction values were similar in both versions
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5467962
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54679622017-06-19 The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment Aliukonis, Paulius Letauta, Tadas Briedienė, Rūta Naruševičiūtė, Ieva Letautienė, Simona Acta Med Litu Research Article Background. Standardised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines for the assessment of prostate alterations were designed for the assessment of prostate pathology. Published by the ESUR in 2012, PI-RADS v1 was based on the total score of different MRI sequences with subsequent calculation. PI-RADS v2 was published by the American College of Radiology in 2015 and featured different assessment criteria for prostate peripheral and transitory zones. Aim. To assess the correlations of PI-RADS v1 and PI-RADS v2 with Gleason score values and to define their predictive values of the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of 66 patients. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) value and the Gleason score (GS) were assessed. One the most malignant focal lesion was selected in the peripheral zone of each lobe of the prostate (91 in total). Statistical analysis was carried out applying SPSS software, v.23, p < 0.05. Results. Focal lesions assessed by PI-RADS v1 score: 10% – 1, 12% – 2, 41% – 3, 23% – 4, 14% – 5. Assessment applying PI-RADS v.2: 20% – 1, 7.5% – 2, 26%, 29.5%, and 17% were assessed by 3, 4, and 5 scores. Statistically relevant correlation was found only between GS and PI-RADS (p = 0.033). The positive predictive value of both versions of PI-RADS – 75%, negative predictive value of PI-RADS v1 – 46%, PI-RADS v2 – 43%. Conclusions. PI-RADS v1 was more statistically relevant in assessing the grade of tumour. Prediction values were similar in both versions Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Publishers 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5467962/ /pubmed/28630592 http://dx.doi.org/10.6001/actamedica.v24i1.3462 Text en © Lietuvos mokslų akademija, 2017
spellingShingle Research Article
Aliukonis, Paulius
Letauta, Tadas
Briedienė, Rūta
Naruševičiūtė, Ieva
Letautienė, Simona
The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title_full The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title_fullStr The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title_full_unstemmed The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title_short The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
title_sort role of different pi-rads versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5467962/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28630592
http://dx.doi.org/10.6001/actamedica.v24i1.3462
work_keys_str_mv AT aliukonispaulius theroleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT letautatadas theroleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT briedieneruta theroleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT naruseviciuteieva theroleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT letautienesimona theroleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT aliukonispaulius roleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT letautatadas roleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT briedieneruta roleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT naruseviciuteieva roleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment
AT letautienesimona roleofdifferentpiradsversionsinprostatemultiparametricmagneticresonancetomographyassessment