Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jan;69(1):16-40.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052. Epub 2015 Oct 1.

PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2

Jeffrey C Weinreb  1 , Jelle O Barentsz  2 , Peter L Choyke  3 , Francois Cornud  4 , Masoom A Haider  5 , Katarzyna J Macura  6 , Daniel Margolis  7 , Mitchell D Schnall  8 , Faina Shtern  9 , Clare M Tempany  10 , Harriet C Thoeny  11 , Sadna Verma  12
Affiliations

PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2

Jeffrey C Weinreb et al. Eur Urol. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

The Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADS™ v2) is the product of an international collaboration of the American College of Radiology (ACR), European Society of Uroradiology (ESUR), and AdMetech Foundation. It is designed to promote global standardization and diminish variation in the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) examination, and it is based on the best available evidence and expert consensus opinion. It establishes minimum acceptable technical parameters for prostate mpMRI, simplifies and standardizes terminology and content of reports, and provides assessment categories that summarize levels of suspicion or risk of clinically significant prostate cancer that can be used to assist selection of patients for biopsies and management. It is intended to be used in routine clinical practice and also to facilitate data collection and outcome monitoring for research.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate; Prostate MRI; Prostate cancer; Prostate mpMRI.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1 –
Fig. 1 –. Anatomy of the prostate illustrated on T2-weighted imaging (modified from Bonekamp D, Jacobs MA, El-Khouli R, et al. Advancements in MR maging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics 2011;31(3):677; with permission.).
Fig. 2 –
Fig. 2 –. Measurements of the prostate on T2-weighted images used for volume assessment with the prolate ellipsoid formula (length × width × height × 0.52).
Fig. 3 –
Fig. 3 –. PI-RADS assessment for peripheral zone on T2-weighted imaging.
Fig. 4 –
Fig. 4 –. PI-RADS assessment for transition zone on T2-weighted imaging.
Fig. 5 –
Fig. 5 –. PI-RADS assessment for peripheral zone on diffusion weighted imaging.
Fig. 6 –
Fig. 6 –. PI-RADS assessment for transition zone on diffusion weighted imaging.
Fig. 7 –
Fig. 7 –. PI-RADS assessment for dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

Introduction

    1. Thornbury JR, Ornstein DK, Choyke PL, Langlotz CP, Weinreb JC. Prostate Cancer: What is the future for imaging? Am J Roentgenology 2001;176:17–22. - PubMed
    1. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. European Urology.2011;4:477–94. - PubMed
    1. Eberhardt SC, Carter S, Casalino DD, Merrick G, Frank SJ, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® for Prostate Cancer — pretreatment detection, staging and surveillance. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10(2);83–92 - PubMed
    1. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. European Radiol 2012;4:746–57. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V, Eggener S, Emberton M, Futterer JJ, et al. Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an international working group. European Urology 2013;64:544–552 - PubMed

Section I: Clinical Considerations and Technical Specifications

    1. Wagner M, Rief M, Busch, Scheuring C, Taupitz M, et al. Effect of butylscopolamine on image quality in MRI of the prostate. Clin radiol 2012;65:460–465 - PubMed
    1. Rosenkrantz AB, Kopec M, Kong X, Melamed J, Dakwar G, Babb JS, et al. Prostate cancer vs. post-biopsy hemorrhage: diagnosis with T2- and diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010. June;31(6): 1387–94. - PubMed
    1. Rosenkrantz AB, Mussi TC, Hindman N, Lim RP, Knong MX, et al. Impact of dealy after biopsy and post-biopsy haemorrhage on prostate cancer tumor detection using mulit-parametric MRI: a multi-reader study. Clin Radiol 2012;67:83–90 - PubMed
    1. Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Yamamoto A, Yamashita T, Egashira N, et al. Prostate cancer: relationships between postbiopsy hemorrhage and tumor detectability at MR diagnosis. Radiology 2008;248:531–539 - PubMed
    1. Barrett T, Vargas HA, Akin O, Goldman DA, Hricak H. Value of the hemorrhage exclusion sign on T1-weighted prostate MR images for the detection of prostate cancer. Radiology 2012;263:751–757 - PMC - PubMed

Section II: Normal Anatomy and Benign Findings

    1. McNeal JE. The Zonal anatomy of the prostate. The Prostate 1981;2:35–49 - PubMed
    2. McNeal JE. Normal histology of the prostate. Am J Surg Pathol 1988;12:619–33 - PubMed
    1. Villers A, Lemaitre L, Haffner J, Puech P. Current status of MRI for the diagnosis, staging and prognosis of prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy and active surveillance. Curr Opin Urol 2009;19:274–82 - PubMed
    1. Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, Goldman DA, Udo K, et al. Normal cnetal s zone of the prostate and central zone involvement by prostate cancer: clinical and MR imaging implications. Radiology 2012;262:894–902 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shebel HM, Farg HM, Kolokythas O, El-Diasty T. Cysts of the lower male genitourinary tract: embryologic and anatomic considerations and differential diagnosis. Radiographics 2013. Jul- Aug;33(4):1125–43. - PubMed
    1. Krieger JN, Lee SWH, Jeon J, Cheah PY, Liong ML, et al. Epidemiology of prostatitis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008:31 (Suppl 1): 85–90 - PMC - PubMed

Section III: Assessment and Reporting

    1. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994. February 2;271(5):368–74. - PubMed
    1. Goto Y, Ohori M, Arakawa A, Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. Distinguishing clinically important from unimportant prostate cancers before treatment: value of systematic biopsies. J Urol 1996. September;156(3): 1059–63. - PubMed
    1. Harnden P, Naylor B, Shelley MD, Clements H, Coles B, Mason MD. The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: what are the risks of progression? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer 2008. March 1;112(5):971–81. - PubMed
    1. Wolters T, Roobol MJ, van Leeuwen PJ, van den Bergh RC, Hoedemaeker RF, van Leenders GJ, 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 2011. January;185(1): 121–5. - PubMed
    1. Vargas HA, Akin O, Shukla-Dave A, Zhang J, Zakian KL, et al. Performance characteristics of MR imaging in the evaluation of clinically low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective study. Radiology 2012;265:478–487 - PMC - PubMed

Section V: Staging

    1. Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Laheij RJ, Verbeek AL, van Lier HJ, Barentsz JO. Local staging of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. European Radiol 2002. September;12(9):2294–302. - PubMed
    1. Johnston R, Wong LM, Warren A, Shah N, Neal D. The role of 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging in staging prostate cancer. ANZ J Surg 2013. April;83(4):234–8. - PubMed
    1. Wang L, Mullerad M, Chen HN, Eberhardt SC, Kattan MW, Scardino PT, Hricak H. Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction of extracapsular extension. Radiology 2004;232:133–9. - PubMed
    1. Renard-Penna R, Roupret M, Comperat E, Ayed A, Coudert M, Mozer P, et al. Accuracy of high resolution (1.5 tesla) pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in staging prostate cancer in candidates for radical prostatectomy: results from a prospective study. Urologic Oncology 2013. May;31(4):448–54. - PubMed
    1. Thoeny HC, Froeliich JM, Triantafyllou M, Huesler J, Bains LJ, et al. Metastases in norma-sized pelvic lymph nodes: detection with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 2014;273:125–135 - PubMed

MeSH terms