Improving the understanding of PI-RADS in practice: characters of PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions with negative biopsy

被引:3
|
作者
Wang, Yu-Hao [1 ]
Liang, Chao [1 ]
Zhu, Fei-Peng [2 ]
Zhou, Tian-Ren [1 ]
Li, Jie [1 ]
Wang, Zeng-Jun [1 ]
Liu, Bian-Jiang [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Urol, Nanjing 210029, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Radiol, Nanjing 210029, Peoples R China
关键词
biopsy; negative; PI-RADS; 4; and; 5; prostate cancer; PROSTATE-CANCER; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.4103/aja2022112
中图分类号
R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
摘要
The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) has good ability to identify the nature of lesions on prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, some lesions are still reported as PI-RADS 4 and 5 but are biopsy-proven benign. Herein, we aimed to summarize the reasons for the negative prostate biopsy of patients who were assessed as PI-RADS 4 and 5 by biparameter MRI. We retrospectively sorted out the prostate MRI, treatment, and follow-up results of patients who underwent a biparameter MRI examination of the prostate in The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (Nanjing, China) from August 2019 to June 2021 with PI-RADS 4 and 5 but a negative biopsy. We focused on reviewing the MRI characteristics. A total of 467 patients underwent transperineal prostate biopsy. Among them, biopsy pathology of 93 cases were negative. After follow-up, 90 patients were ruled out of prostate cancer. Among the 90 cases, 40 were considered to be overestimated PI-RADS after review. A total of 22 cases were transition zone (TZ) lesions with regular appearance and clear boundaries, and 3 cases were symmetrical lesions. Among 15 cases, the TZ nodules penetrated the peripheral zone (PZ) and were mistaken for the origin of PZ. A total of 17 cases of lesions were difficult to distinguish from prostate cancer. Among them, 5 cases were granulomatous inflammation (1 case of prostate tuberculosis). A total of 33 cases were ambiguous lesions, whose performance was between PI-RADS 3 and 4. In summary, the reasons for "false-positive MRI diagnosis " included PI-RADS overestimation, ambiguous images giving higher PI-RADS, diseases that were really difficult to distinguish, and missed lesion in the initial biopsy; and the first two accounted for the most.
引用
收藏
页码:217 / 222
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] PI-RADS: what is new and how to use it
    Silvina P. Dutruel
    Sunil Jeph
    Daniel J. A. Margolis
    Natasha Wehrli
    Abdominal Radiology, 2020, 45 : 3951 - 3960
  • [42] Outcomes of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy of PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 Lesions
    Gosein, Maria
    Pang, Emily
    Chang, Silvia
    Black, Peter
    Goldenberg, Larry
    Harris, Alison
    Yasenjiang, Jason
    Yousefi, Masoud
    CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, 2018, 69 (03): : 303 - 310
  • [43] A COMPARISON OF TARGETED PROSTATE BIOPSY OUTCOMES BY PI-RADS SCORE AND ETHNICITY
    Zhu, Denzel
    Hines, Laena
    DeMasi, Matt
    Chernyak, Victoria
    Kovac, Evan
    Aboumohamed, Ahmed
    Sankin, Alex
    Agalliu, Ilir
    Watts, Kara
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 206 : E783 - E784
  • [44] PI-RADS Version 2: A Pictorial Update
    Purysko, Andrei S.
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Weinreb, Jeffrey C.
    Macura, Katarzyna J.
    RADIOGRAPHICS, 2016, 36 (05) : 1354 - 1372
  • [45] PI-RADS: multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer
    Aileen O’Shea
    Mukesh Harisinghani
    Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine, 2022, 35 : 523 - 532
  • [46] PI-RADS: multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer
    O'Shea, Aileen
    Harisinghani, Mukesh
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE MATERIALS IN PHYSICS BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2022, 35 (04) : 523 - 532
  • [47] Follow-up of men with a PI-RADS 4/5 lesion after negative MRI/Ultrasound fusion biopsy
    Kira Kornienko
    Miriam Reuter
    Andreas Maxeiner
    Karsten Günzel
    Beatrice Kittner
    Maximilian Reimann
    Sebastian L. Hofbauer
    Laura E. Wiemer
    Robin Heckmann
    Patrick Asbach
    Johann Jakob Wendler
    Martin Schostak
    Thorsten Schlomm
    Frank Friedersdorff
    Hannes Cash
    Scientific Reports, 12
  • [48] Comparison of the PI-RADS 2.1 scoring system to PI-RADS 2.0: Impact on diagnostic accuracy and inter-reader agreement
    Hotker, Andreas M.
    Bluthgen, Christian
    Rupp, Niels J.
    Schneider, Aurelia F.
    Eberli, Daniel
    Donati, Olivio F.
    PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (10):
  • [49] Follow-up of men with a PI-RADS 4/5 lesion after negative MRI/Ultrasound fusion biopsy
    Kornienko, Kira
    Reuter, Miriam
    Maxeiner, Andreas
    Gunzel, Karsten
    Kittner, Beatrice
    Reimann, Maximilian
    Hofbauer, Sebastian L.
    Wiemer, Laura E.
    Heckmann, Robin
    Asbach, Patrick
    Wendler, Johann Jakob
    Schostak, Martin
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    Friedersdorff, Frank
    Cash, Hannes
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [50] Factors Impacting Performance and Reproducibility of PI-RADS
    Turkbey, Baris
    Oto, Aytekin
    CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, 2021, 72 (03): : 337 - 338