Suppr超能文献

PI-RADS v2 与 PI-RADS v2.1 的读者间可变性:大多数新的不一致源于评分 1 和 2。

Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Charite University Hospital Berlin, Germany.

Department of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charite University Hospital Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

Rofo. 2022 Aug;194(8):852-861. doi: 10.1055/a-1752-1038. Epub 2022 May 11.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To analyze possible differences in the inter-reader variability between PI-RADS version 2 (v2) and version 2.1 (v2.1) for the classification of prostate lesions using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the prostate.

METHODS

In this retrospective and randomized study, 239 annotated and histopathologically correlated prostate lesions (104 positive and 135 negative for prostate cancer) were rated twice by three experienced uroradiologists using PI-RADS v2 and v2.1 with an interval of at least two months between readings. Results were tabulated across readers and reading timepoints and inter-reader variability was determined using Fleiss' kappa (κ). Thereafter, an additional analysis of the data was performed in which PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, as they have the same clinical consequences.

RESULTS

PI-PI-RADS v2.1 showed better inter-reader agreement in the peripheral zone (PZ), but poorer inter-reader agreement in the transition zone (TZ) (PZ: κ = 0.63 vs. κ = 0.58; TZ: κ = 0.47 vs. κ = 0.57). When PI-RADS scores 1 and 2 were combined, the use of PI-RADS v2.1 resulted in almost perfect inter-reader agreement in the PZ and substantial agreement in the TZ (PZ: κ = 0.81; TZ: κ = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

PI-RADS v2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ. New differences in inter-reader agreement were mainly the result of the assignment of PI-RADS v2.1 scores 1 and 2 to lesions in the TZ. Combining scores 1 and 2 improved inter-reader agreement both in the TZ and in the PZ, indicating that refined definitions may be warranted for these PI-RADS scores.

KEY POINTS

· PI-RADSv2.1 improves inter-reader agreement in the PZ but not in the TZ.. · New differences derived from PI-RADSv2.1 scores 1 and 2 in the TZ.. · Combined PI-RADSv2.1 scores of 1 and 2 yielded better inter-reader agreement.. · PI-RADSv2.1 appears to provide more precise description of lesions in the PZ.. · Improved inter-reader agreement in the PZ stresses the importance of appropriate lexicon description..

CITATION FORMAT

· Beetz N, Haas M, Baur A et al. Inter-Reader Variability Using PI-RADS v2 Versus PI-RADS v2.1: Most New Disagreement Stems from Scores 1 and 2. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 852 - 861.

摘要

目的

分析使用前列腺多参数 MRI(mpMRI)对前列腺病变进行分类时,PI-RADS 版本 2(v2)和版本 2.1(v2.1)之间的读者间可变性的可能差异。

方法

在这项回顾性、随机研究中,由三位经验丰富的泌尿放射科医生对 239 个标注并与组织病理学相关的前列腺病变进行了两次评分,两次评分之间至少间隔两个月。将结果在读者和阅读时间点上进行制表,并使用 Fleiss' kappa(κ)确定读者间的可变性。然后,对数据进行了进一步分析,将 PI-RADS 评分 1 和 2 合并,因为它们具有相同的临床后果。

结果

PI-RADS v2.1 在周边区(PZ)的读者间一致性更好,但在移行区(TZ)的读者间一致性更差(PZ:κ=0.63 比 κ=0.58;TZ:κ=0.47 比 κ=0.57)。当将 PI-RADS 评分 1 和 2 合并时,PI-RADS v2.1 在 PZ 中几乎达到完美的读者间一致性,在 TZ 中达到高度一致(PZ:κ=0.81;TZ:κ=0.80)。

结论

PI-RADS v2.1 提高了 PZ 的读者间一致性。读者间一致性的新差异主要是由于将 PI-RADS v2.1 的评分 1 和 2 分配给 TZ 中的病变所致。将评分 1 和 2 合并后,在 TZ 和 PZ 中都提高了读者间的一致性,这表明这些 PI-RADS 评分可能需要更精细的定义。

关键点

  • PI-RADSv2.1 提高了 PZ 中的读者间一致性,但在 TZ 中没有提高。

  • 源自 TZ 中的 PI-RADSv2.1 评分 1 和 2 的新差异。

  • PI-RADSv2.1 评分 1 和 2 的合并评分产生了更好的读者间一致性。

  • PI-RADSv2.1 似乎为 PZ 中的病变提供了更精确的描述。

  • PZ 中读者间一致性的提高强调了适当词汇描述的重要性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验