Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

PI-RADS 3 lesions: a critical review and discussion of how to improve management

  • Special Section: Male pelvis
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the publication of PI-RADS v1 in 2012, the debate regarding the question of how to manage PI-RADS 3 lesions has been mostly unsolved. However, based on our review of the current literature we discuss possible solutions and improvements to the original classification, factors such as PSAD (Prostate Specific Antigen Density), age, and tumor volume, in the decision of whether to proceed with a biopsy or not.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, Tempany CM, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Margolis DJ, Thoeny HC, Verma S, Barentsz J, Weinreb JC (2019) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 76 (3):340-351. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033

  2. Yang S, Zhao W, Tan S, Zhang Y, Wei C, Chen T, Shen J (2020) Combining clinical and MRI data to manage PI-RADS 3 lesions and reduce excessive biopsy. Transl Androl Urol 9 (3):1252-1261. doi:https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-19-755

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. van der Leest M, Israel B, Cornel EB, Zamecnik P, Schoots IG, van der Lelij H, Padhani AR, Rovers M, van Oort I, Sedelaar M, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Hannink G, Veltman J, Barentsz J (2019) High Diagnostic Performance of Short Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocols for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-naive Men: The Next Step in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Accessibility. Eur Urol 76 (5):574-581. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.05.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zawaideh JP, Sala E, Shaida N, Koo B, Warren AY, Carmisciano L, Saeb-Parsy K, Gnanapragasam VJ, Kastner C, Barrett T (2020) Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI: assessment of contrast benefit in clinical practice. European radiology 30 (7):4039-4049. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06782-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Liddell H, Jyoti R, Haxhimolla HZ (2015) mp-MRI Prostate Characterised PIRADS 3 Lesions are Associated with a Low Risk of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer - A Retrospective Review of 92 Biopsied PIRADS 3 Lesions. Curr Urol 8 (2):96-100. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000365697

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Schlenker B, Apfelbeck M, Armbruster M, Chaloupka M, Stief CG, Clevert DA (2019) Comparison of PIRADS 3 lesions with histopathological findings after MRI-fusion targeted biopsy of the prostate in a real world-setting. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 71 (2):165-170. doi:https://doi.org/10.3233/CH-189407

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wadera A, Alabousi M, Pozdnyakov A, Kashif Al-Ghita M, Jafri A, McInnes MD, Schieda N, van der Pol CB, Salameh JP, Samoilov L, Gusenbauer K, Alabousi A (2021) Impact of PI-RADS Category 3 lesions on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting prostate cancer and the prevalence of prostate cancer within each PI-RADS category: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The British journal of radiology 94 (1118):20191050. doi:https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20191050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Distler FA, Radtke JP, Bonekamp D, Kesch C, Schlemmer HP, Wieczorek K, Kirchner M, Pahernik S, Hohenfellner M, Hadaschik BA (2017) The Value of PSA Density in Combination with PI-RADS for the Accuracy of Prostate Cancer Prediction. The Journal of urology 198 (3):575-582. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wei X, Xu J, Zhong S, Zou J, Cheng Z, Ding Z, Zhou X (2022) Diagnostic value of combining PI-RADS v2.1 with PSAD in clinically significant prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY) 47 (10):3574–3582. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03592-4

  10. Bittencourt LK, Guricova K, Zucker I, Durieux JC, Schoots IG (2022) Risk-based MRI-directed diagnostic pathway outperforms non-risk-based pathways in suspected prostate cancer biopsy-naive men: a large cohort validation study. European radiology 32 (4):2330-2339. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08407-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu J, Dong B, Qu W, Wang J, Xu Y, Yu S, Zhang X (2020) Using clinical parameters to predict prostate cancer and reduce the unnecessary biopsy among patients with PSA in the gray zone. Sci Rep 10 (1):5157. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-62015-w

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Sheridan AD, Nath SK, Syed JS, Aneja S, Sprenkle PC, Weinreb JC, Spektor M (2018) Risk of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Associated With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 (Equivocal) Lesions Identified on Multiparametric Prostate MRI. AJR American journal of roentgenology 210 (2):347-357. doi:https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.18516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fang AM, Shumaker LA, Martin KD, Jackson JC, Fan RE, Khajir G, Patel HD, Soodana-Prakash N, Vourganti S, Filson CP, Sonn GA, Sprenkle PC, Gupta GN, Punnen S, Rais-Bahrami S (2022) Multi-institutional analysis of clinical and imaging risk factors for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions. Cancer 128 (18):3287-3296. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.34355

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rico L, Blas L, Vitagliano G, Contreras P, Rios Pita H, Ameri C (2021) PI-RADS 3 lesions: Does the association of the lesion volume with the prostate-specific antigen density matter in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 39 (7):431 e439–431 e413. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.11.010

  15. Martorana E, Aisa MC, Grisanti R, Santini N, Pirola GM, Datti A, Gerli S, Bonora A, Burani A, Scalera GB, Scialpi P, Di Blasi A, Scialpi M (2022) Lesion Volume in a Bi- or Multivariate Prediction Model for the Management of PI-RADS v2.1 Score 3 Category Lesions. Turk J Urol 48 (4):268–277. doi:https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2022.22038

  16. Scialpi M, Martorana E, Aisa MC, Rondoni V, D'Andrea A, Bianchi G (2017) Score 3 prostate lesions: a gray zone for PI-RADS v2. Turk J Urol 43 (3):237-240. doi:https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2017.01058

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Turkbey B, Mani H, Aras O, Rastinehad AR, Shah V, Bernardo M, Pohida T, Daar D, Benjamin C, McKinney YL, Linehan WM, Wood BJ, Merino MJ, Choyke PL, Pinto PA (2012) Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology. The Journal of urology 188 (4):1157-1163. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.06.011

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Abdominal Radiology, SUNY-Upstate Medical University, 750 East Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA

    Refky Nicola

  2. School of Medicine, Abdominal Imaging, Case Western University, 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA

    Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt

Authors
  1. Refky Nicola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Refky Nicola.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nicola, R., Bittencourt, L.K. PI-RADS 3 lesions: a critical review and discussion of how to improve management. Abdom Radiol 48, 2401–2405 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03929-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03929-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation