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
Review
. 2021 Feb 1;94(1118):20200934.
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20200934. Epub 2020 Nov 11.

Imaging quality and prostate MR: it is time to improve

Affiliations
Review

Imaging quality and prostate MR: it is time to improve

Francesco Giganti et al. Br J Radiol. .

Abstract

The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines set out the minimal technical requirements for the acquisition of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate. However, the rapid diffusion of this technique has inevitably led to variability in scan quality among centres across the UK and the world. Suboptimal image acquisition reduces the sensitivity and specificity of this technique for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and results in clinicians losing confidence in the technique.Two expert panels, one from the UK and one from the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)/EAU Section of Urologic Imaging (ESUI), have stressed the importance to establish quality criteria for the acquisition of mpMRI of the prostate. A first attempt to address this issue has been the publication of the Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score, which assesses the mpMRI quality against a set of objective criteria (PI-RADS guidelines) together with criteria obtained from the image.PI-QUAL represents the first step towards the standardisation of a scoring system to assess the quality of prostate mpMRI prior to reporting and allows clinicians to have more confidence in using the scan to determine patient care. Further refinements after robust consensus among experts at an international level need to be agreed before its widespread adoption in the clinical setting.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Giganti F, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Panebianco V, Stabile A, Emberton M, et al. . The evolution of MRI of the prostate: the past, the present, and the future. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2019; 213: 384–96. doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20796 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, et al. . MRI-Targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 2018; 378: 1767–77. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. . ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 746–57. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, et al. . PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 16–40. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, et al. . Prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1: 2019 update of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2. Eur Urol 2019; 76: 340–51. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033 - DOI - PubMed