Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis ; 25(2): 256-263, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34230616

RESUMO

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.


Assuntos
Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Neoplasias da Próstata , Algoritmos , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Próstata/patologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos
2.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261499, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34929009

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: International guidelines propose color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) as primary imaging techniques in the diagnosis of acute splanchnic vein thrombosis. However, their reliability in this context is poorly investigated. Therefore, the aim of our study was to validate CDUS and CT in the radiologic assessment of acute splanchnic vein thrombosis, using direct transjugular spleno-portography as gold standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 49 patients with non-malignant acute splanchnic vein thrombosis were included in a retrospective, multicenter analysis. The thrombosis' extent in five regions of the splanchnic venous system (right and left intrahepatic portal vein, main trunk of the portal vein, splenic vein, superior mesenteric vein) and the degree of thrombosis (patent, partial thrombosis, complete thrombosis) were assessed by portography, CDUS and CT in a blinded manner. Reliability of CDUS and CT with regard to portography as gold standard was analyzed by calculating Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Results of CDUS and CT were consistent with portography in 76.6% and 78.4% of examinations, respectively. Cohen's kappa demonstrated that CDUS and CT delivered almost equally reliable results with regard to the portographic gold standard (k = 0.634 [p < 0.001] vs. k = 0.644 [p < 0.001]). In case of findings non-consistent with portography there was no clear trend to over- or underestimation of the degree of thrombosis in both CDUS (60.0% vs. 40.0%) and CT (59.5% vs. 40.5%). CONCLUSIONS: CDUS and CT are equally reliable tools in the radiologic assessment of non-malignant acute splanchnic vein thrombosis.


Assuntos
Veias/diagnóstico por imagem , Trombose Venosa/diagnóstico por imagem , Angiografia por Tomografia Computadorizada , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Portografia , Circulação Esplâncnica , Ultrassonografia Doppler em Cores
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA