Assessment of the compliance with minimum acceptable technical parameters proposed by PI-RADS v2 guidelines in multiparametric prostate MRI acquisition in tertiary referral hospitals in the Republic of Turkey

Özet

PURPOSEAlthough the clinical use of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) isincreasing, the adherence to parameters for mpMRI, which had been described in the ProstateImaging-Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) for an optimum image acquisition isunknown. In this paper, we aimed to determine the compliance with the minimum acceptabletechnical parameters for prostate mpMRI defined by PI-RADS v2 in tertiary care centers in Turkey.METHODSWe sent a survey to all radiology departments of tertiary referral hospitals in Turkey (n=120)to evaluate their adherence to PI-RADS v2 technical specifications. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square, Fisher exact, ANOVA, and the Student t tests. The cutoff values for image acquisition times were also determined with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.RESULTSOne hundred and eleven clinics responded to our survey (response rate, 92.5%). Prostate MRIwas reported to be performed in 61 centers, of which 26 (42.6%) used 3 T (Tesla) scanner while35 (57.4%) used 1.5 T. The adherence to slice thickness, in-plane phase and frequency resolutionson T2-weighted imaging were 68.9%, 41%, and 9.8%, respectively. The adherence to the sameparameters on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were higher compared with T2-weighted imaging (85.2%, 62.3%, and 78.7%, respectively). In comparative analysis, the adherence to slicethickness, field of view (FOV) and in-plane phase resolution on T2-weighted imaging were higherfor 3 T compared with 1.5 T scanners (P = 0.004, P = 0.041, and P = 0.001, respectively). T2-weighted imaging acquisition time was significantly longer for the centers that adhered to FOV (P =0.034) and in-plane T2-weighted imaging phase resolution (P = 0.028). The DWI scan time wassignificantly longer when they adhered to DWI-FOV (P = 0.014) and b value ≥1400 s/mm2 (P =0.008). The calculated cutoff of scan times were 220 s in T2-weighted imaging and 312 s in DWIto ensure the compliance with voxel sizes and b value criteria.CONCLUSIONThe tertiary referral centers in Turkey did not meet majority of the technical specifications of PI-RADSv2 during prostate MRI acquisition. Awareness to the minimum acceptable technical parameters ofmpMRI should be increased to potentially improve the quality of prostate cancer imaging.