![]() ![]() The median difference from the reference standard using the ellipsoid formula derived PGV was 0.4 mL (interquartile range, −3.9 to 5.1 mL) for PI-RADS v2.0 (p = 0.393) and 2.6 mL (interquartile range, −1.6 to 7.3 mL) for v2.1 (p < 0.001) with a median difference of 2.2 mL. Inter-reader agreement was excellent for the ellipsoid and bullet formulas using PI-RADS v2.0 (ICC 0.985 and 0.987) and v2.1 (ICC 0.990 and 0.994), respectively. Inter-reader agreement was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). #PROSTATE VOLUME CALCULATOR MANUAL#Calculated volumes were compared to the reference manual segmentations using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. MRI-based PGV was calculated using the ellipsoid and bullet formulas. Four different radiologists independently measured the prostate in three dimensions according to PI-RADS v2.0 and v2.1, respectively. Prostates were manually contoured and segmented on axial T2-weighted images. Ninety-five consecutive treatment-naive patients undergoing prostate MRI were retrospectively analyzed. Furthermore, to assess inter-reader agreement for the different measurement approaches, determine the influence of an enlarged transition zone on measurement accuracy and to assess the value of the bullet formula for PGV calculation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the agreement of MRI-based PGV calculations with the volumetric manual slice-by-slice prostate segmentation as a reference standard using the linear measurements per PI-RADS versions 2.0 and 2.1. The recently updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2.1 includes a change in the recommended measurement method for PGV compared to version 2.0. Prostate gland volume (PGV) should be routinely included in MRI reports of the prostate. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |