Multiparametric prostate MRI quality assessment using a semi-automated PI-QUAL software program
Tóm tắt
The technical requirements for the acquisition of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate have been clearly outlined in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines, but there is still huge variability in image quality among centres across the world. It has been difficult to quantify what constitutes a good-quality image, and a first attempt to address this matter has been the publication of the Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL) score and its dedicated scoring sheet. This score includes the assessment of technical parameters that can be obtained from the DICOM files along with a visual evaluation of certain features on prostate MRI (e.g., anatomical structures). We retrospectively analysed the image quality of 10 scans from different vendors and magnets using a semiautomated dedicated PI-QUAL software program and compared the time needed for assessing image quality using two methods (semiautomated assessment versus manual filling of the scoring sheet). This semiautomated software is able to assess the technical parameters automatically, but the visual assessment is still performed by the radiologist. There was a significant reduction in the reporting time of prostate mpMRI quality according to PI-QUAL using the dedicated software program compared to manual filling (5′54″ versus 7′59″; p = 0.005). A semiautomated PI-QUAL software program allows the radiologist to assess the technical details related to the image quality of prostate mpMRI in a quick and reliable manner, allowing clinicians to have more confidence that the quality of mpMRI of the prostate is sufficient to determine patient care.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Giannarini G, Valotto C, Girometti R, Dal Moro F, Briganti A, Padhani AR (2021) Measuring the quality of diagnostic prostate magnetic resonance imaging: a urologist’s perspective. Eur Urol 79:440–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.015
Giganti F, Kasivisvanathan V, Kirkham et al (2021) Prostate MRI quality: a critical review of the last 5 years and the role of the PI-QUAL score. Br J Radiol 20210415:20210415. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20210415
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al (2019) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.1: 2019 update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 0232:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033
Brizmohun Appayya M, Adshead J, Ahmed H et al (2018) National implementation of multi-parametric MRI for prostate cancer detection - recommendations from a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int 122:13–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14361
De Rooij M, Israël B, Tummers M et al (2020) ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists’ training. Eur Radiol 30:5404–5416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06929-z
Giganti F, Allen C, Emberton M, Moore CM, Kasivisvanathan V (2020) Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL): a new quality control scoring system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate from the PRECISION trial. Eur Urol Oncol 3:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.007
Wichmann JL, Willemink MJ, De Cecco CN (2021) Artificial intelligence and machine learning in radiology: current state and considerations for routine clinical implementation. Invest Radiol 55:619–627. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000673
Van Leeuwen KG, Schalekamp S, Rutten MJCM, van Ginneken B, de Rooij M (2021) Artificial intelligence in radiology: 100 commercially available products and their scientific evidence. Eur Radiol 31:3797–3804. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000673
Twilt JJ, van Leeuwen KG, Huisman HJ, Fütterer JJ, de Rooij M (2021) Artificial intelligence based algorithms for prostate cancer classification and detection on magnetic resonance imaging: a narrative review. Diagnostics (Basel) 11 :959. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11060959, 6.
Stocker D, Finkenstaedt T, Kuehn b et al (2018) Performance of an automated versus a manual whole-body magnetic resonance imaging workflow. Invest Radiol 53:463–471. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000471
Esser M, Zinsser D, Kündel M, et al (2020) Performance of an automated workflow for magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: comparison with a manual workflow. Invest Radiol 55:277–284. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000635
Bardis MD, Houshyar R, Chang P, et al (2020) Application of artificial intelligence to prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): current and emerging trends. Cancers (Basel) 12(5):1204. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12051204
Sanford T, Harmon SA, Turkbey EB, et al (2020) Deep-learning-based artificial intelligence for PI-RADS classification to assist multiparametric prostate MRI Interpretation: a development study. J Magn Reson Imaging 52:1499–1507. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27204
Yang L, Zhang Y, Chen J, Zhang S, Chen DZ (2017) Suggestive annotation: a deep active learning framework for biomedical image segmentation. International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017; Springer 399-407. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66179-7_46
Piccini D, Demesmaeker R, Heerfordt J et al (2020) Deep learning to automate reference-free image quality assessment of whole-heart MR images. Radiol Artif Intell 2:e190123. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.2020190123
Giganti F, Dinneen E, Kasivisvanathan V et al (2021) Inter-reader agreement of the PI-QUAL score for prostate MRI quality in the NeuroSAFE PROOF trial. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08169-1