SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Urology / 2021 / Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 1

PI-RADSv2.1: Current status

Stephanie M. WALKER
Barış TÜRKBEY
Pages
S45–S48
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Updates included in PI-RADSv2.1 and its current experience in clinic will be reviewed in this review.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has played an increasing role in the detection and local staging of prostate cancer over the last 15 years.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Prostate mpMRI, due to various factors, is prone to high inter-reader variability necessitating standardized reporting guidelines that provide accurate and actionable information to the ordering clinician.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Updates included in PI-RADSv2.1 and its current experience in clinic will be reviewed in this review.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has played an increasing role in the detection and local staging of prostate cancer over the last 15 years. Prostate mpMRI, due to various factors, is prone to high inter-reader variability necessitating standardized reporting guidelines that provide accurate and actionable information to the ordering clinician. The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System version 2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1) was released in March 2019 as an update to PI-RADSv2.0 with the hope of further standardizing the reporting process of prostate mpMRI, improving the detection of clinically significant cancer, reducing the biopsy rate of indolent tumors, and decreasing inter-reader variability. Early data show an improved performance of PI-RADSv2.1 over PI-RADSv2.0. Updates included in PI-RADSv2.1 and its current experience in clinic will be reviewed in this review.

🔖

Cite This Article

WALKER, S. M., TÜRKBEY, B. (2021). PI-RADSv2.1: Current status. Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 47 - Sayı: 1, S45–S48. https://ajindex.com/articles/413259

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin, 2018
  2. [Crossref] 2. Rawla P. Epidemiology of Prostate Cancer. World J Oncol 2019
  3. [Crossref] 3. Smith CP, Harmon SA, Barrett T, Bittencourt LK, Law YM, Shebel H, et al. Intra- and interreader reproducibility of PI-RADSv2: A multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019
  4. [Crossref] 4. Barentsz J, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012
  5. [Crossref] 5. 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
  6. [Crossref] 6. Greer MD, Shih JH, Barrett T, Bednarova S, Kabakus I, Law YM, et al. All over the map: An interobserver agreement study of tumor location based on the PI-RADSv2 sector map. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018
  7. [Crossref] 7. Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D, Froemming AT, Gupta RT, Turkbey B, et al. Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. Radiology 2016
  8. [Crossref] 8. Greer MD, Brown AM, Shih JH, Summers RM, Marko J, Law YM, et al. Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: A multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017
  9. [Crossref] 9. 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
  10. [Crossref] 10. Linhares Moreira AS, De Visschere P, Van Praet C, Villeirs G. How does PI-RADS v2.1 impact patient classification? A head-to-head comparison between PI-RADS v2.0 and v2.1. Acta Radiologica 2020
  11. 0284185120941831. [Crossref] 11. Tamada T, Kido A, Takeuchi M, Yamamoto A, Miyaji Y, Kanomata N, et al. Comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and PI-RADS version 2.1 for the detection of transition zone prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 2019
  12. 108704. [Crossref] 12. Wei CG, Zhang YY, Pan P, Chen T, Yu HC, Dai GC, et al., Diagnostic Accuracy and Inter-observer Agreement of PI-RADS Version 2 and Version 2.1 for the Detection of Transition Zone Prostate Cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2020
  13. DOI: 10.2214/ AJR.20.23883. [Crossref] 13. Li