Lee Kang-Lung, Caglic Iztok, Liao Po-Hsiang, Kessler Dimitri A, Guo Chao-Yu, Barrett Tristan
Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Department of Radiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Eur Radiol. 2025 Jun;35(6):3096-3104. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11233-1. Epub 2024 Nov 29.
Prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL) was developed to standardise the evaluation of prostate MRI quality and has recently been updated to version 2. This study aims to assess inter-reader agreement for PI-QUAL v1 and v2 scores and investigates changes in MRI quality score categories.
The study retrospectively analysed 350 multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) scans. Two expert uroradiologists independently assessed mpMRI quality using PI-QUAL v1 and v2 guidelines. Biparametric MRI (bpMRI) categorisation based on PI-QUAL v2 included only T2WI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) results. Inter-reader agreement was determined using percentage agreement and kappa, and categorisation comparisons were made using the chi-square test.
Substantial inter-reader agreement was observed for the overall PI-QUAL v1 score (κ = 0.64) and moderate agreement for v2 mpMRI (κ = 0.54) and v2 bpMRI scores (κ = 0.57). Inter-reader agreements on individual sequences were similar between v1 and v2 (kappa for individual sequences: T2WI, 0.46 and 0.49; DWI, 0.66 and 0.70; DCE, 0.71 and 0.61). Quality levels shifted from predominantly "optimal" in v1 (65%) down to "acceptable" using v2 (55%); p < 0.001. The addition of DCE increased the proportion of cases with at least "adequate" quality at mpMRI (64%) compared to bpMRI (30%); p < 0.001.
This study shows consistent inter-reader agreement between PI-QUAL v1 and v2, encompassing overall and individual sequence categorisation. A notable shift from "optimal" to "acceptable" quality was demonstrated when moving from v1 to v2, with DCE tending improving quality from "inadequate" (bpMRI) to "acceptable" (mpMRI).
Question What are the agreement levels of image quality of prostate MRI by using PI-QUAL v1 and v2? Findings Inter-reader agreement based on PI-QUAL v1 and v2 is comparable. Dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) enables an overall shift from inadequate quality (at bpMRI) to acceptable quality (mpMRI). Clinical relevance The inter-reader agreement on PI-QUAL v1 and v2 is equivalent. PI-QUAL v2 assesses prostate bpMRI as well as mpMRI quality. Transitioning from inadequate to acceptable between v2-bpMRI and v2-mpMRI highlights the role of DCE as an "image quality safety net."
前列腺成像质量(PI-QUAL)旨在规范前列腺MRI质量评估,最近已更新至第2版。本研究旨在评估PI-QUAL v1和v2评分的阅片者间一致性,并调查MRI质量评分类别的变化。
本研究回顾性分析了350例多参数MRI(mpMRI)扫描。两位专家级泌尿放射科医生使用PI-QUAL v1和v2指南独立评估mpMRI质量。基于PI-QUAL v2的双参数MRI(bpMRI)分类仅包括T2WI和扩散加权成像(DWI)结果。使用百分比一致性和kappa值确定阅片者间一致性,并使用卡方检验进行分类比较。
PI-QUAL v1总体评分的阅片者间一致性较高(κ = 0.64),v2 mpMRI(κ = 0.54)和v2 bpMRI评分的一致性为中等(κ = 0.57)。v1和v2在各个序列上的阅片者间一致性相似(各序列的kappa值:T2WI,0.46和0.49;DWI,0.66和0.70;DCE,0.71和0.61)。质量水平从v1中主要为“最佳”(65%)转变为使用v2时的“可接受”(55%);p < 0.001。与bpMRI(30%)相比,DCE的加入增加了mpMRI中至少具有“足够”质量的病例比例(64%);p < 0.001。
本研究表明PI-QUAL v1和v2之间的阅片者间一致性一致,包括总体和各个序列的分类。从v1到v2时,质量从“最佳”显著转变为“可接受”,DCE倾向于将质量从“不足”(bpMRI)提高到“可接受”(mpMRI)。
问题 使用PI-QUAL v1和v2时前列腺MRI图像质量的一致性水平如何?发现 基于PI-QUAL v1和v2的阅片者间一致性具有可比性。动态对比增强(DCE)使质量从不足(bpMRI时)整体转变为可接受(mpMRI时)。临床意义 PI-QUAL v1和v2的阅片者间一致性相当。PI-QUAL v2评估前列腺bpMRI以及mpMRI质量。从v2-bpMRI到v2-mpMRI从不足转变为可接受突出了DCE作为“图像质量安全网”的作用。