scholarly journals Standardization of Multiparametric Prostate MR Imaging Using PI-RADS

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce G. R. Bomers ◽  
Jelle O. Barentsz
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Data System ◽  
Single Parameter ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Multiparametric Imaging ◽  
Prostate Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri

The purpose of this paper is to introduce and describe the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Archiving Data System (PI-RADS). For every single parameter the PI-RADS scoring system will be explained and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examples will be given. In the end two patient cases are presented to explain the overall interpretation score in multiparametric imaging.

scholarly journals The OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scoring System: Updated Recommendations by the OMERACT MRI in Arthritis Working Group

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 1706-1712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikkel Østergaard ◽  
Charles G. Peterfy ◽  
Paul Bird ◽  
Frédérique Gandjbakhch ◽  
Daniel Glinatsi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Image Resolution ◽  
Sensitivity To Change ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri

Objective.The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scoring system (RAMRIS), evaluating bone erosion, bone marrow edema/osteitis, and synovitis, was introduced in 2002, and is now the standard method of objectively quantifying inflammation and damage by MRI in RA trials. The objective of this paper was to identify subsequent advances and based on them, to provide updated recommendations for the RAMRIS.Methods.MRI studies relevant for RAMRIS and technical and scientific advances were analyzed by the OMERACT MRI in Arthritis Working Group, which used these data to provide updated considerations on image acquisition, RAMRIS definitions, and scoring systems for the original and new RA pathologies. Further, a research agenda was outlined.Results.Since 2002, longitudinal studies and clinical trials have documented RAMRIS variables to have face, construct, and criterion validity; high reliability and sensitivity to change; and the ability to discriminate between therapies. This has enabled RAMRIS to demonstrate inhibition of structural damage progression with fewer patients and shorter followup times than has been possible with conventional radiography. Technical improvements, including higher field strengths and improved pulse sequences, allow higher image resolution and contrast-to-noise ratio. These have facilitated development and validation of scoring methods of new pathologies: joint space narrowing and tenosynovitis. These have high reproducibility and moderate sensitivity to change, and can be added to RAMRIS. Combined scores of inflammation or joint damage may increase sensitivity to change and discriminative power. However, this requires further research.Conclusion.Updated 2016 RAMRIS recommendations and a research agenda were developed.

scholarly journals Using magnetic resonance imaging in animal models to guide drug development in multiple sclerosis

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nabeela Nathoo ◽  
V Wee Yong ◽  
Jeff F Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Animal Models ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Preclinical Studies ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Potential Therapeutics

Major advances are taking place in the development of therapeutics for multiple sclerosis (MS), with a move past traditional immunomodulatory/immunosuppressive therapies toward medications aimed at promoting remyelination or neuroprotection. With an increase in diversity of MS therapies comes the need to assess the effectiveness of such therapies. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is one of the main tools used to evaluate the effectiveness of MS therapeutics in clinical trials. As all new therapeutics for MS are tested in animal models first, it is logical that MRI be incorporated into preclinical studies assessing therapeutics. Here, we review key papers showing how MR imaging has been combined with a range of animal models to evaluate potential therapeutics for MS. We also advise on how to maximize the potential for incorporating MRI into preclinical studies evaluating possible therapeutics for MS, which should improve the likelihood of discovering new medications for the condition.

scholarly journals Comparing Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADSv2) Category 1 and 2 Groups: Clinical Implication of Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Jung Kwon Kim ◽  
Hak Jong Lee ◽  
Sung Il Hwang ◽  
Gheeyoung Choe ◽  
Sung Kyu Hong
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Data System ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Prostate Imaging ◽  
Gleason Pattern ◽  
Clinical Databases

Objectives. To evaluate the clinicopathological differences between Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 (v2) category 1 and 2 groups. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed our two institutional clinical databases: (1) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion biopsy cohort (n=706) and (2) radical prostatectomy (RP) cohort (n=1403). Subsequently, we performed comparative analyses between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as the presence of Gleason score GS≥3+4 in a single biopsy core, and adverse pathology (AP) was defined as high-grade (primary Gleason pattern 4 or any pattern 5) and/or non-organ-confined disease (pT3/N1). We also performed multivariate logistic regression analyses for AP. Results. In the TRUS/MRI fusion biopsy cohort, no significant differences in detection rates of all cancer (18.2% vs. 29.0%, respectively, P=0.730) or csPCa (9.1% vs. 9.9%, respectively, P=0.692) were observed between PI-RADSv2 category 1 and 2 groups. There were no significant differences in pathologic outcomes including Gleason score (≥4+3, 21.2% vs. 29.9%, respectively, P=0.420) or detection rate of AP (27.3% vs. 33.8%, respectively, P=0.561) between the two groups in the RP cohort either. PI-RADSv2 category 1 or 2 had no significant association with AP, even in univariate analysis (P=0.299). Conclusions. PI-RADSv2 categories 1 and 2 had similar performance to predict clinicopathological outcomes. Consequently, these two categories may be unified into a single category. Negative mpMRI does not guarantee the absence of AP, as with csPCa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document