Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36359499›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Are Urologists Ready for Interpretation of Multiparametric MRI Findings? A Prospective Multicentric Evaluation.

Guglielmo Mantica, Nazareno Suardi, Salvatore Smelzo, Francesco Esperto, Francesco Chierigo, Stefano Tappero, Marco Borghesi, Roberto La Rocca, Marco Oderda, Marco Ennas and 13 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Evaluating the perceptions of Canadian urology residents and program directors regarding the current training in genitourinary imaging.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

23 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Guglielmo ManticaDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4361-4523
Nazareno SuardiDepartment of Urology, Spedali Civili of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Salvatore SmelzoDepartment of Urology, San Raffaele Turro Hospital, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Francesco EspertoDepartment of Urology, Campus Biomedico Hospital, University Campus Biomedico, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Francesco ChierigoDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7357-0758
Stefano TapperoDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9712-2685
Marco BorghesiDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy.
Roberto La RoccaUrology Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", 80131 Naples, Italy.
Marco OderdaUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.
Marco EnnasUnit of Urology, Department of Abdominal Surgery, Galliera Hospital, 16128 Genoa, Italy.
Armando StabileDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Francesco De CobelliDepartment of Radiology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4014-3711
Luigi NapolitanoUrology Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2036-0356
Rocco PapaliaDepartment of Surgical and Diagnostic Integrated Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16126 Genoa, Italy.
Paolo GonteroUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.
Carlo IntroiniUnit of Urology, Department of Abdominal Surgery, Galliera Hospital, 16128 Genoa, Italy.
Alberto BrigantiDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Roberto M ScarpaDepartment of Urology, Campus Biomedico Hospital, University Campus Biomedico, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo MironeUrology Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples "Federico II", 80131 Naples, Italy.
Francesco MontorsiDivision of Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Franco GaboardiDepartment of Urology, San Raffaele Turro Hospital, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Carlo TerroneDepartment of Urology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy.
Gianpiero CardoneDiagnostic and Interventional Radiology Department, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele-Turro, Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · ITIRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele · ITUniversity of Naples Federico II · ITEnte Ospedaliero Ospedali Galliera · ITSan Raffaele University of Rome · ITUniversity of Turin · ITVita-Salute San Raffaele University · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITUniversity of Genoa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To assess urologists’ proficiency in the interpretation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). Materials and Methods: Twelve mpMRIs were shown to 73 urologists from seven Italian institutions. Responders were asked to identify the site of the suspicious nodule (SN) but not to assign a PIRADS score. We set an a priori cut-off of 75% correct identification of SN as a threshold for proficiency in mpMRI reading. Data were analyzed according to urologists’ hierarchy (UH; resident vs. consultant) and previous experience in fusion prostate biopsies (E-fPB, defined as <125 vs. ≥125). Additionally, we tested for differences between non-proficient vs. proficient mpMRI readers. Multivariable logistic regression analyses (MVLRA) tested potential predictors of proficiency in mpMRI reading. Results: The median (IQR) number of correct identifications was 8 (6−8). Anterior nodules (number 3, 4 and 6) represented the most likely prone to misinterpretation. Overall, 34 (47%) participants achieved the 75% cut-off. When comparing consultants vs. residents, we found no differences in terms of E-fPB (p = 0.9) or in correct identification rates (p = 0.6). We recorded higher identification rates in urologists with E-fBP vs. their no E-fBP counterparts (75% vs. 67%, p = 0.004). At MVLRA, only E- fPB reached the status of independent predictor of proficiency in mpMRI reading (OR: 3.4, 95% CI 1.2−9.9, p = 0.02) after adjusting for UH and type of institution. Conclusions: Despite urologists becoming more familiar with interpretation of mpMRI, their results are still far from proficient. E-fPB enhances the proficiency in mpMRI interpretation.

Indexed as

diagnosismpMRIprostate cancertraining

Identifiers

PMID36359499
PMCPMC9689928
OpenAlexW4307921301

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.