Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 10/2020

Open Access 01-10-2020 | Prostate Cancer | Urogenital

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

Authors: Maarten de Rooij, Bas Israël, Marcia Tummers, Hashim U. Ahmed, Tristan Barrett, Francesco Giganti, Bernd Hamm, Vibeke Løgager, Anwar Padhani, Valeria Panebianco, Philippe Puech, Jonathan Richenberg, Olivier Rouvière, Georg Salomon, Ivo Schoots, Jeroen Veltman, Geert Villeirs, Jochen Walz, Jelle O. Barentsz

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

This study aims to define consensus-based criteria for acquiring and reporting prostate MRI and establishing prerequisites for image quality.

Methods

A total of 44 leading urologists and urogenital radiologists who are experts in prostate cancer imaging from the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) and EAU Section of Urologic Imaging (ESUI) participated in a Delphi consensus process. Panellists completed two rounds of questionnaires with 55 items under three headings: image quality assessment, interpretation and reporting, and radiologists’ experience plus training centres. Of 55 questions, 31 were rated for agreement on a 9-point scale, and 24 were multiple-choice or open. For agreement items, there was consensus agreement with an agreement ≥ 70% (score 7–9) and disagreement of ≤ 15% of the panellists. For the other questions, a consensus was considered with ≥ 50% of votes.

Results

Twenty-four out of 31 of agreement items and 11/16 of other questions reached consensus. Agreement statements were (1) reporting of image quality should be performed and implemented into clinical practice; (2) for interpretation performance, radiologists should use self-performance tests with histopathology feedback, compare their interpretation with expert-reading and use external performance assessments; and (3) radiologists must attend theoretical and hands-on courses before interpreting prostate MRI. Limitations are that the results are expert opinions and not based on systematic reviews or meta-analyses. There was no consensus on outcomes statements of prostate MRI assessment as quality marker.

Conclusions

An ESUR and ESUI expert panel showed high agreement (74%) on issues improving prostate MRI quality. Checking and reporting of image quality are mandatory. Prostate radiologists should attend theoretical and hands-on courses, followed by supervised education, and must perform regular performance assessments.

Key Points

• Multi-parametric MRI in the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer has a well-established upfront role in the recently updated European Association of Urology guideline and American Urological Association recommendations.
• Suboptimal image acquisition and reporting at an individual level will result in clinicians losing confidence in the technique and returning to the (non-MRI) systematic biopsy pathway. Therefore, it is crucial to establish quality criteria for the acquisition and reporting of mpMRI.
• To ensure high-quality prostate MRI, experts consider checking and reporting of image quality mandatory. Prostate radiologists must attend theoretical and hands-on courses, followed by supervised education, and must perform regular self- and external performance assessments.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E et al (2019) EAU – ESTRO – ESUR – SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer 2019 European Association of Urology guidelines 2019 Edition. European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E et al (2019) EAU – ESTRO – ESUR – SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer 2019 European Association of Urology guidelines 2019 Edition. European Association of Urology Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
2.
go back to reference Bjurlin MA, Carroll PR, Eggener S et al (2020) Update of the Standard Operating Procedure on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer. J Urol 203:706–712 Bjurlin MA, Carroll PR, Eggener S et al (2020) Update of the Standard Operating Procedure on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer. J Urol 203:706–712
3.
go back to reference Moldovan PC, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R et al (2017) What is the negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in excluding prostate cancer at biopsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer guidelines panel. Eur Urol 72:250–266CrossRef Moldovan PC, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R et al (2017) What is the negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in excluding prostate cancer at biopsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer guidelines panel. Eur Urol 72:250–266CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Panebianco V, Barchetti G, Simone G et al (2018) Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what’s next? Eur Urol 74:48–54CrossRef Panebianco V, Barchetti G, Simone G et al (2018) Negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what’s next? Eur Urol 74:48–54CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Drost FH, Osses D, Nieboer D et al (2020) Prostate magnetic resonance imaging, with or without magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 77:78–94CrossRef Drost FH, Osses D, Nieboer D et al (2020) Prostate magnetic resonance imaging, with or without magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 77:78–94CrossRef
6.
go back to reference van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israel B et al (2019) Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol 75:570–578CrossRef van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israel B et al (2019) Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol 75:570–578CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777CrossRef Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Rouviere O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R et al (2019) Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 20:100–109CrossRef Rouviere O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R et al (2019) Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 20:100–109CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822CrossRef Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB et al (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 76:284–303CrossRef Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB et al (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 76:284–303CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I et al (2018) Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries and 25 major cancers in 2018. Eur J Cancer 103:356–387CrossRef Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I et al (2018) Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries and 25 major cancers in 2018. Eur J Cancer 103:356–387CrossRef
12.
go back to reference 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 76:340–351CrossRef 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 76:340–351CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Yeh JS, Van Hoof TJ, Fischer MA (2016) Key features of academic detailing: development of an expert consensus using the Delphi method. Am Health Drug Benefits 9:42–50PubMedPubMedCentral Yeh JS, Van Hoof TJ, Fischer MA (2016) Key features of academic detailing: development of an expert consensus using the Delphi method. Am Health Drug Benefits 9:42–50PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Brizmohun Appayya M, Adshead J, Ahmed HU et al (2018) National implementation of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection - recommendations from a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int 122:13–25CrossRef Brizmohun Appayya M, Adshead J, Ahmed HU et al (2018) National implementation of multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection - recommendations from a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int 122:13–25CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Esses SJ, Taneja SS, Rosenkrantz AB (2018) Imaging facilities’ adherence to PI-RADS v2 minimum technical standards for the performance of prostate MRI. Acad Radiol 25:188–195CrossRef Esses SJ, Taneja SS, Rosenkrantz AB (2018) Imaging facilities’ adherence to PI-RADS v2 minimum technical standards for the performance of prostate MRI. Acad Radiol 25:188–195CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Burn PR, Freeman SJ, Andreou A, Burns-Cox N, Persad R, Barrett T (2019) A multicentre assessment of prostate MRI quality and compliance with UK and international standards. Clin Radiol 74:894 e819–894 e825CrossRef Burn PR, Freeman SJ, Andreou A, Burns-Cox N, Persad R, Barrett T (2019) A multicentre assessment of prostate MRI quality and compliance with UK and international standards. Clin Radiol 74:894 e819–894 e825CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Engels RRM, Israel B, Padhani AR, Barentsz JO (2020) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: what urologists need to know. part 1: acquisition. Eur Urol 77:457–468 Engels RRM, Israel B, Padhani AR, Barentsz JO (2020) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: what urologists need to know. part 1: acquisition. Eur Urol 77:457–468
18.
go back to reference van der Leest M, Israel B, Cornel EB et al (2019) High diagnostic performance of short magnetic resonance imaging protocols for prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naive men: the next step in magnetic resonance imaging accessibility. Eur Urol 76:574–581CrossRef van der Leest M, Israel B, Cornel EB et al (2019) High diagnostic performance of short magnetic resonance imaging protocols for prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naive men: the next step in magnetic resonance imaging accessibility. Eur Urol 76:574–581CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Barentsz JO, van der Leest MMG, Israel B (2019) Reply to Jochen Walz. Let’s keep it at one step at a time: why biparametric magnetic resonance imaging is not the priority today. Eur Urol 2019;76:582-3: how to implement high-quality, high-volume prostate magnetic resonance imaging: Gd contrast can help but is not the major issue. Eur Urol 76:584–585CrossRef Barentsz JO, van der Leest MMG, Israel B (2019) Reply to Jochen Walz. Let’s keep it at one step at a time: why biparametric magnetic resonance imaging is not the priority today. Eur Urol 2019;76:582-3: how to implement high-quality, high-volume prostate magnetic resonance imaging: Gd contrast can help but is not the major issue. Eur Urol 76:584–585CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Barrett T, Slough R, Sushentsev N et al (2019) Three-year experience of a dedicated prostate mpMRI pre-biopsy programme and effect on timed cancer diagnostic pathways. Clin Radiol 74:894 e891–894 e899 Barrett T, Slough R, Sushentsev N et al (2019) Three-year experience of a dedicated prostate mpMRI pre-biopsy programme and effect on timed cancer diagnostic pathways. Clin Radiol 74:894 e891–894 e899
21.
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 40:134–142CrossRef 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 40:134–142CrossRef
22.
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–W100CrossRef 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–W100CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Rosenkrantz AB, Begovic J, Pires A, Won E, Taneja SS, Babb JS (2019) Online interactive case-based instruction in prostate magnetic resonance imaging interpretation using prostate imaging and reporting data system version 2: effect for novice readers. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 48:132–141CrossRef Rosenkrantz AB, Begovic J, Pires A, Won E, Taneja SS, Babb JS (2019) Online interactive case-based instruction in prostate magnetic resonance imaging interpretation using prostate imaging and reporting data system version 2: effect for novice readers. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 48:132–141CrossRef
24.
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 117:80–86CrossRef 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 117:80–86CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Greer MD, Brown AM, Shih JH et al (2017) Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: a multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:579–585CrossRef Greer MD, Brown AM, Shih JH et al (2017) Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: a multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:579–585CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N et al (2019) Interreader variability of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 in detecting and assessing prostate cancer lesions at prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212:1197–1205CrossRef Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N et al (2019) Interreader variability of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 in detecting and assessing prostate cancer lesions at prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212:1197–1205CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Gatti M, Faletti R, Calleris G et al (2019) Prostate cancer detection with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) by readers with different experience: performance and comparison with multiparametric (mpMRI). Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:1883–1893CrossRef Gatti M, Faletti R, Calleris G et al (2019) Prostate cancer detection with biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) by readers with different experience: performance and comparison with multiparametric (mpMRI). Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:1883–1893CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Girometti R, Giannarini G, Greco F et al (2019) Interreader agreement of PI-RADS v. 2 in assessing prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI: a study using whole-mount histology as the standard of reference. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:546–555CrossRef Girometti R, Giannarini G, Greco F et al (2019) Interreader agreement of PI-RADS v. 2 in assessing prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI: a study using whole-mount histology as the standard of reference. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:546–555CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Hansen NL, Koo BC, Gallagher FA et al (2017) Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol 27:2259–2266CrossRef Hansen NL, Koo BC, Gallagher FA et al (2017) Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol 27:2259–2266CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Puech P, Randazzo M, Ouzzane A et al (2015) How are we going to train a generation of radiologists (and urologists) to read prostate MRI? Curr Opin Urol 25:522–535CrossRef Puech P, Randazzo M, Ouzzane A et al (2015) How are we going to train a generation of radiologists (and urologists) to read prostate MRI? Curr Opin Urol 25:522–535CrossRef
Metadata
Title
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
Authors
Maarten de Rooij
Bas Israël
Marcia Tummers
Hashim U. Ahmed
Tristan Barrett
Francesco Giganti
Bernd Hamm
Vibeke Løgager
Anwar Padhani
Valeria Panebianco
Philippe Puech
Jonathan Richenberg
Olivier Rouvière
Georg Salomon
Ivo Schoots
Jeroen Veltman
Geert Villeirs
Jochen Walz
Jelle O. Barentsz
Publication date
01-10-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06929-z

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

European Radiology 10/2020 Go to the issue