Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 9/2018

01-09-2018

Long-distance longitudinal prostate MRI quality assurance: from startup to 12 months

Authors: Nicole E. Curci, Patrick Gartland, Prasad R. Shankar, Jeffrey S. Montgomery, David C. Miller, Arvin K. George, Matthew S. Davenport

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 9/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate a 12-month long-distance prostate MRI quality assurance (QA) program.

Methods

The need for IRB approval was waived for this prospective longitudinal QA effort. One academic institution experienced with prostate MRI [~ 1000 examinations/year (Site 2)] partnered with a private institution 240 miles away that was starting a new prostate MRI program (Site 1). Site 1 performed all examinations (N = 249). Four radiologists at Site 1 created finalized reports, then sent images and reports to Site 2 for review on a rolling basis. One radiologist at Site 2 reviewed findings and exam quality and discussed results by phone (~ 2–10 minutes/MRI). In months 1–6 all examinations were reviewed. In months 7–12 only PI-RADS ≤ 2 and ‘difficult’ cases were reviewed. Repeatability was assessed with intra-class correlation (ICC). ‘Clinically significant cancer’ was Gleason ≥ 7.

Results

Image quality significantly (p < 0.001) improved after the first three months. Inter-rater agreement also improved in months 3–4 [ICC: 0.849 (95% CI 0.744–0.913)] and 5–6 [ICC: 0.768 (95% CI 0.619–0.864)] compared to months 1–2 [ICC: 0.621 (95% CI 0.436–0.756)]. PI-RADS ≤ 2 examinations were reclassified PI-RADS ≥ 3 in 19% (30/162); of these, 23 had post-MRI histology and 57% (13/23) had clinically significant cancer (5.2% of 249). False-negative examinations [N = 18 (PI-RADS ≤ 2 and Gleason ≥ 7)] were more common at Site 1 during months 1–6 [9% (14/160) vs. 4% (4/89)]. Positive predictive values for PI-RADS ≥ 3 were similar.

Conclusion

Remote quality assurance of prostate MRI is feasible and useful, enabling new programs to gain durable skills with minimal risk to patients.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging-reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging-reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Vargas HA, Hotker AM, Goldman DA, et al. (2016) Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol 26:1606–1612CrossRefPubMed Vargas HA, Hotker AM, Goldman DA, et al. (2016) Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol 26:1606–1612CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 13:390–397CrossRef Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 13:390–397CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D, et al. (2016) Interobserver reproducibility of the PI-RADS version 2 lexicon: a multicenter study of six experienced prostate radiologists. Radiology 280:793–804CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rosenkrantz AB, Ginocchio LA, Cornfeld D, et al. (2016) Interobserver reproducibility of the PI-RADS version 2 lexicon: a multicenter study of six experienced prostate radiologists. Radiology 280:793–804CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Gaziev G, Wadhwa K, Barrett T, et al. (2016) Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI-transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool. BJU Int 117:80–86CrossRefPubMed Gaziev G, Wadhwa K, Barrett T, et al. (2016) Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI-transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool. BJU Int 117:80–86CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Ayoola A, Hoffman D, et al. (2017) The learning curve in prostate MRI interpretation: self-directed learning versus continual reader feedback. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:W92–W100CrossRefPubMed Rosenkrantz AB, Ayoola A, Hoffman D, et al. (2017) The learning curve in prostate MRI interpretation: self-directed learning versus continual reader feedback. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:W92–W100CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Harris RD, Schned AR, Heaney JA (1995) Staging of prostate cancer with endorectal MR imaging: iessons from a learning curve. RadioGraphics 15:813–829CrossRefPubMed Harris RD, Schned AR, Heaney JA (1995) Staging of prostate cancer with endorectal MR imaging: iessons from a learning curve. RadioGraphics 15:813–829CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Akin O, Riedl CC, Ishill NM, et al. (2010) Interactive dedicated training curriculum improves accuracy in the interpretation of MR imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 20:995–1002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Akin O, Riedl CC, Ishill NM, et al. (2010) Interactive dedicated training curriculum improves accuracy in the interpretation of MR imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 20:995–1002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Latchamsetty KC, Borden LS Jr, Porter CR, et al. (2007) Experience improves staging accuracy of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: what is the learning curve? Can J Urol 14:3429–3434PubMed Latchamsetty KC, Borden LS Jr, Porter CR, et al. (2007) Experience improves staging accuracy of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: what is the learning curve? Can J Urol 14:3429–3434PubMed
10.
go back to reference Garcia-Reyes K, Passoni NM, Palmeri ML, et al. (2015) Detection of prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): effect of dedicated reader education on accuracy and confidence of index and anterior cancer diagnosis. Abdom Imaging 40:134–142CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Garcia-Reyes K, Passoni NM, Palmeri ML, et al. (2015) Detection of prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): effect of dedicated reader education on accuracy and confidence of index and anterior cancer diagnosis. Abdom Imaging 40:134–142CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Kierans AS, Taneja SS, Rosenkrantz AB (2015) Implementation of multi-parametric prostate MRI in clinical practice. Curr Urol Rep 16:56CrossRefPubMed Kierans AS, Taneja SS, Rosenkrantz AB (2015) Implementation of multi-parametric prostate MRI in clinical practice. Curr Urol Rep 16:56CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Leake JL, Hardman R, Ojili V, et al. (2014) Prostate MRI: access to and current practice of prostate MRI in the United States. J Am Coll Radiol 11:156–160CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Leake JL, Hardman R, Ojili V, et al. (2014) Prostate MRI: access to and current practice of prostate MRI in the United States. J Am Coll Radiol 11:156–160CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Muthigi A, Sidana A, George AK, et al. (2017) Current beliefs and practice patterns among urologists regarding prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-targeted biopsy. Urol Oncol 35:32.e1–32.37. Muthigi A, Sidana A, George AK, et al. (2017) Current beliefs and practice patterns among urologists regarding prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-targeted biopsy. Urol Oncol 35:32.e1–32.37.
15.
go back to reference Alpert HR, Hillman BJ (2004) Quality and variability in diagnostic radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 1:127–132CrossRefPubMed Alpert HR, Hillman BJ (2004) Quality and variability in diagnostic radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 1:127–132CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Mungovan SF, Sandhu JS, Akin O, et al. (2007) Preoperative membranous urethra length measurement and continence recovery following radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 71(3):368–378 Mungovan SF, Sandhu JS, Akin O, et al. (2007) Preoperative membranous urethra length measurement and continence recovery following radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 71(3):368–378
17.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Shanbhoque AK, Wang A, et al. (2016) Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: assessment at an optimal threshold. J Magn Reson Imaging 43:990–997CrossRefPubMed Rosenkrantz AB, Shanbhoque AK, Wang A, et al. (2016) Length of capsular contact for diagnosing extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI: assessment at an optimal threshold. J Magn Reson Imaging 43:990–997CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37:360–363PubMed Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37:360–363PubMed
19.
Metadata
Title
Long-distance longitudinal prostate MRI quality assurance: from startup to 12 months
Authors
Nicole E. Curci
Patrick Gartland
Prasad R. Shankar
Jeffrey S. Montgomery
David C. Miller
Arvin K. George
Matthew S. Davenport
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1481-8

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Abdominal Radiology 9/2018 Go to the issue

Classics in Abdominal Radiology

The onion skin sign of appendiceal mucocele