Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpretation of Multiparametric MRI Using PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prostate MRI Essentials

  • 987 Accesses

Abstract

Multiparametric prostate MRI integrates both anatomical sequences and functional imaging, and it has undergone rapid growth in the last decade. At least in part, the increased adoption of MRI is due to the development of the PI-RADS scoring system, which improved the standardization of acquisition and interpretation of prostate MRI. Further, accumulated experience with PI-RADS has shown good accuracy in prostate cancer detection. The latest revision of PI-RADS addressed a few shortcomings of earlier versions. Herein we present a practical approach to the use of PI-RADS to detect prostate cancer, as well as to avoid pitfalls that mimic malignancy.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Oberlin DT, Casalino DD, Miller FH, Meeks JJ. Dramatic increase in the utilization of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for detection and management of prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol. 2017;42(4):1255–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(4):746–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Westphalen AC, Rosenkrantz AB. Prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS): reflections on early experience with a standardized interpretation scheme for multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(1):121–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 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(1):16–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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(3):340–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Vache T, Bratan F, Mege-Lechevallier F, Roche S, Rabilloud M, Rouviere O. Characterization of prostate lesions as benign or malignant at multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of three scoring systems in patients treated with radical prostatectomy. Radiology. 2014;272(2):446–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Akin O, Sala E, Moskowitz CS, Kuroiwa K, Ishill NM, Pucar D, et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology. 2006;239(3):784–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hoeks CM, Hambrock T, Yakar D, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Feuth T, Witjes JA, et al. Transition zone prostate cancer: detection and localization with 3-T multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology. 2013;266(1):207–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Lim RP, Hindman N, Deng FM, Babb JS, et al. Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) and Likert scales. Radiology. 2013;269(2):482–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, Barrett T, Kayat Bittencourt L, Borofsky S, et al. Validation of the dominant sequence paradigm and role of dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging in PI-RADS version 2. Radiology. 2017;285(3):859–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. ACR® American College of Radiology. PI-RADS® Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System. 2019 V 2.1. https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/RADS/Pi-RADS/PIRADS-V2-1.pdf?la=en

  12. Jordan EJ, Fiske C, Zagoria RJ, Westphalen AC. Evaluating the performance of PI-RADS v2 in the non-academic setting. Abdom Radiol. 2017;42(11):2725–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM, Chenevert TL, Thoeny HC, Takahara T, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia. 2009;11(2):102–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Westphalen AC, Fazel F, Nguyen H, Cabarrus M, Hanley-Knutson K, Shinohara K, et al. Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions. Int Braz J Urol. 2019;45:713–23.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Jordan EJ, Fiske C, Zagoria R, Westphalen AC. PI-RADS v2 and ADC values: is there room for improvement? Abdom Radiol. 2018;43(11):3109–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, Bernardo M, Xu S, Kruecker J, et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology. 2011;258(2):488–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Donati OF, Mazaheri Y, Afaq A, Vargas HA, Zheng J, Moskowitz CS, et al. Prostate cancer aggressiveness: assessment with whole-lesion histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology. 2014;271(1):143–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS. Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(1):109–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosenkrantz AB, Babb JS, Taneja SS, Ream JM. Proposed adjustments to PI-RADS version 2 decision rules: impact on prostate Cancer detection. Radiology. 2017;283(1):119–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Muglia VF, Westphalen AC, Wang ZJ, Kurhanewicz J, Carroll PR, Coakley FV. Endorectal MRI of prostate cancer: incremental prognostic importance of gross locally advanced disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(6):1369–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, Goldman DA, Udo K, Touijer KA, et al. Normal central zone of the prostate and central zone involvement by prostate cancer: clinical and MR imaging implications. Radiology. 2012;262(3):894–902.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH. Diagnostic performance of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for detection of prostate Cancer: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2017;72(2):177–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Venderink W, van Luijtelaar A, Bomers JG, van der Leest M, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Barentsz JO, et al. Results of targeted biopsy in men with magnetic resonance imaging lesions classified equivocal, likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;73:353–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mehralivand S, Bednarova S, Shih JH, Mertan FV, Gaur S, Merino MJ, et al. Prospective evaluation of PI-RADS version 2 using the International Society of Urological Pathology Prostate Cancer Grade Group System. J Urol. 2017;198(3):583–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Barkovich EJ, Shankar PR, Westphalen AC. A systematic review of the existing prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADSv2) literature and subset meta-analysis of PI-RADSv2 categories stratified by Gleason scores. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212(4):847–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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;280(3):793–804.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lin WC, Muglia VF, Silva GE, Chodraui Filho S, Reis RB, Westphalen AC. Multiparametric MRI of the prostate: diagnostic performance and interreader agreement of two scoring systems. Br J Radiol. 2016;89(1062):20151056.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, Barrett T, Bittencourt L, Borofsky S, et al. Interreader variability of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 in detecting and assessing prostate Cancer lesions at prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;212:1197–205. 10.2214/AJR.18.20536.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tran GN, Leapman MS, Nguyen HG, Cowan JE, Shinohara K, Westphalen AC, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy during prostate cancer active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2017;72(2):275–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Borofsky S, George AK, Gaur S, Bernardo M, Greer MD, Mertan FV, et al. What are we missing? False-negative cancers at multiparametric MR imaging of the prostate. Radiology. 2018;286(1):186–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Garcia-Reyes K, Nguyen HG, Zagoria RJ, Shinohara K, Carroll PR, Behr SC, et al. Impact of lesion visibility on Transrectal ultrasound on the prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason score 3 + 4 or greater) with transrectal ultrasound-magnetic resonance imaging fusion biopsy. J Urol. 2018;199(3):699–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Meermeier NP, Foster BR, Liu JJ, Amling CL, Coakley FV. Impact of direct MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate on clinical management. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019;213(2):371–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosenkrantz AB, Verma S, Choyke P, Eberhardt SC, Eggener SE, Gaitonde K, et al. Prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in patients with a prior negative biopsy: a consensus statement by AUA and SAR. J Urol. 2016;196(6):1613–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Sanda MG, Chen RC, Crispino T, Freedland S, Greene K, Klotz LH, Makarov DV, Nelson JB, Reston J, Rodrigues G, Sandler HM, Taplin ME, Cadeddu JA. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline 2017. Available from: https://www.auanet.org/guidelines/prostate-cancer-clinically-localized-guideline

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Portland, OR, USA

    Bryan R. Foster

  2. University of California, San Francisco, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, and Urology, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Antonio C. Westphalen

Authors
  1. Bryan R. Foster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Antonio C. Westphalen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bryan R. Foster .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Temel Tirkes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Foster, B.R., Westphalen, A.C. (2020). Interpretation of Multiparametric MRI Using PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System). In: Tirkes, T. (eds) Prostate MRI Essentials. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45935-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45935-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-45934-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-45935-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation