Living systematic review and meta-analysis of the prostate MRI diagnostic test with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment for the detection of prostate cancer: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) standardises reporting of prostate MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. We provide the protocol of a planned living systematic review and meta-analysis for (1) diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity), (2) cancer detection rates of assessment categories and (3) inter-reader agreement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Retrospective and prospective studies reporting on at least one of the outcomes of interest are included. Each step that requires literature evaluation and data extraction is performed by two independent reviewers. Since PI-RADS is intended as a living document itself, a 12-month update cycle of the systematic review and meta-analysis is planned.This protocol is in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Protocols statement. The search strategies including databases, study eligibility criteria, index and reference test definitions, outcome definitions and data analysis processes are detailed. A full list of extracted data items is provided.Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity (for PI-RADS ≥3 and PI-RADS ≥4 considered positive) are derived with bivariate binomial models. Summary estimates of cancer detection rates are calculated with random intercept logistic regression models for single proportions. Summary estimates of inter-reader agreement are derived with random effects models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No original patient data are collected, ethical review board approval, therefore, is not necessary. Results are published in peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journals. We make the collected data accessible as supplemental material to guarantee transparency of results. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022343931.

The Lodwick classification for grading growth rate of lytic bone tumors: a decision tree approach.

The estimation of growth rate of lytic bone tumors based on conventional radiography has been extensively studied. While benign tumors exhibit slow growth, malignant tumors are more likely to show fast growth. The most frequently used algorithm for grading of growth rate on conventional radiography was published by Gwilym Lodwick. Based on the evaluation of the four descriptors (1) type of bone destruction (including the subdescriptor "margin" for geographic lesions), (2) penetration of cortex, (3) presence of a sclerotic rim, and (4) expanded shell, an overall growth grade (IA, IB, IC, II, III) can be assigned, with higher grade representing faster tumor growth. In this article, we provide an easy-to-use decision tree of Lodwick's original grading algorithm, suitable for teaching of students and residents. Subtleties of the grading algorithm and potential pitfalls in clinical practice are explained and illustrated. Exemplary conventional radiographs provided for each descriptor in the decision tree may be used as a guide and atlas for assisting in evaluation of individual features in daily clinical practice.

Cancer detection rates of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories: systematic review and meta-analysis on lesion level and patient level.

BACKGROUND: The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2.1 (PI-RADSv2.1) standardizes reporting of multiparametric MRI of the prostate. Assigned assessment categories are a risk stratification algorithm, higher categories indicate a higher probability of clinically significant cancer compared to lower categories. PI-RADSv2.1 does not define these probabilities numerically. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the cancer detection rates (CDR) of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories on lesion level and patient level. METHODS: Two independent reviewers screen a systematic PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL search for relevant articles (primary outcome: clinically significant cancer, index test: prostate MRI reading according to PI-RADSv2.1, reference standard: histopathology). We perform meta-analyses of proportions with random-effects models for the CDR of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories for clinically significant cancer. We perform subgroup analysis according to lesion localization to test for differences of CDR between peripheral zone lesions and transition zone lesions. RESULTS: A total of 17 articles meet the inclusion criteria and data is independently extracted by two reviewers. Lesion level analysis includes 1946 lesions, patient level analysis includes 1268 patients. On lesion level analysis, CDR are 2% (95% confidence interval: 0-8%) for PI-RADS 1, 4% (1-9%) for PI-RADS 2, 20% (13-27%) for PI-RADS 3, 52% (43-61%) for PI-RADS 4, 89% (76-97%) for PI-RADS 5. On patient level analysis, CDR are 6% (0-20%) for PI-RADS 1, 9% (5-13%) for PI-RADS 2, 16% (7-27%) for PI-RADS 3, 59% (39-78%) for PI-RADS 4, 85% (73-94%) for PI-RADS 5. Higher categories are significantly associated with higher CDR (P < 0.001, univariate meta-regression), no systematic difference of CDR between peripheral zone lesions and transition zone lesions is identified in subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates of CDR demonstrate that PI-RADSv2.1 stratifies lesions and patients as intended. Our results might serve as an initial evidence base to discuss management strategies linked to assessment categories.

Assessment of aortic annulus dimensions for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with high-pitch dual-source CT: Comparison of systolic high-pitch vs. multiphasic data acquisition.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a systolic ECG-gated high-pitch aortoiliac computed tomography (CT) angiography for planning transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Patients referred for TAVI underwent a combined CT imaging with retrospective, multiphasic ECG-gating of the heart and systolic ECG-gated high-pitch aortoiliac CT angiography. Consecutive patients were retrospectively included in this study group. Heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) were assessed during the high-pitch ECG prediction phase. Aortic annulus area (AAA) was planimetrically quantified on both datasets. While only one moment of cardiac cycle was available for measurements in the high-pitch CT, the point of time in the multiphasic CT was chosen, where AAA yielded maximum size. Hypothetical prosthesis sizing was compared between multiphasic vs. high-pitch CT. RESULTS: Among 61 patients (44.2 % men, mean age: 83.3 ± 5.5 years) average heart rate and HRV were 71.0 ± 13.4 bpm and 7.3 ± 8.5 bpm. 20 patients (32.7 %) had atrial fibrillation at the time of image acquisition. There was a strong correlation of AAA as derived from multiphasic vs. the high-pitch CT (r = 0.98). The difference in AAA was 10.5 ± 17.1mm2 (455.1 ± 83.0 mm2 for multiphasic vs. 444.5 ± 87.2 mm2 for high-pitch CT) and did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08). Hypothetical prosthesis sizing showed an agreement in 55 of 61 patients (90.2 %). A sizing based on the high-pitch CT resulted in smaller prosthesis choice in 6 patients, all of them suffering from atrial fibrillation. Mean effective radiation dose was 10.9 ± 6.1 mSv for cardiac CTA and 4.1 ± 1.0 mSv for high-pitch CTA. CONCLUSION: For patients with sinus rhythm, systolic high-pitch aortoiliac CTA provides adequate prosthesis size selection as compared with multiphasic ECG-gated cardiac CTA and may result in significantly reduced radiation exposition.