Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29134351›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

3D T2-weighted imaging to shorten multiparametric prostate MRI protocols.

Stephan H Polanec, Mathias Lazar, Georg J Wengert, Hubert Bickel, Claudio Spick, Martin Susani, Shahrokh Shariat, Paola Clauser, Pascal A T Baltzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Abbreviated MR Protocols in Prostate MRI.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Abbreviated MR Protocols for Chronic Liver Disease and Liver Cancer.Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America · 2021
    Review
  18. Review
  19. The Role of Imaging in Bladder Cancer Diagnosis and Staging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stephan H PolanecDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Mathias LazarDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Georg J WengertDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Hubert BickelDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Claudio SpickDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Martin SusaniClinical Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Shahrokh ShariatDepartment of Urology, Medical University of Vienna (AKH), Waehringer-Guertel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria.
Paola ClauserDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria.
Pascal A T BaltzerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, A-1090, Wien, Vienna, Austria. pascal.baltzer@meduniwien.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine whether 3D acquisitions provide equivalent image quality, lesion delineation quality and PI-RADS v2 performance compared to 2D acquisitions in T2-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3 T.

methodsThis IRB-approved, prospective study included 150 consecutive patients (mean age 63.7 years, 35-84 years; mean PSA 7.2 ng/ml, 0.4-31.1 ng/ml). Two uroradiologists (R1, R2) independently rated image quality and lesion delineation quality using a five-point ordinal scale and assigned a PI-RADS score for 2D and 3D T2-weighted image data sets. Data were compared using visual grading characteristics (VGC) and receiver operating characteristics (ROC)/area under the curve (AUC) analysis.

resultsImage quality was similarly good to excellent for 2D T2w (mean score R1, 4.3 ± 0.81; R2, 4.7 ± 0.83) and 3D T2w (mean score R1, 4.3 ± 0.82; R2, 4.7 ± 0.69), p = 0.269. Lesion delineation was rated good to excellent for 2D (mean score R1, 4.16 ± 0.81; R2, 4.19 ± 0.92) and 3D T2w (R1, 4.19 ± 0.94; R2, 4.27 ± 0.94) without significant differences (p = 0.785). ROC analysis showed an equivalent performance for 2D (AUC 0.580-0.623) and 3D (AUC 0.576-0.629) T2w (p > 0.05, respectively).

conclusionsThree-dimensional acquisitions demonstrated equivalent image and lesion delineation quality, and PI-RADS v2 performance, compared to 2D in T2-weighted imaging of the prostate. Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging could be used to considerably shorten prostate MRI protocols in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • 3D shows equivalent image quality and lesion delineation compared to 2D T2w. • 3D T2w and 2D T2w image acquisition demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance. • Using a single 3D T2w acquisition may shorten the protocol by 40%. • Combined with short DCE, multiparametric protocols of 10 min are feasible.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesProstateProstatic NeoplasmsROC Curve3D imagingAbbreviated protocolMRIMultiparametric MRIProstate

Identifiers

PMID29134351
PMCPMC5834556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.