甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统(thyroid imaging reporting and data system,TI-RADS)是根据超声影像学特征对甲状腺结节恶性风险进行分层的参考依据。目前,国内外尚无统一的TI-RADS,不同的TI-RADS在甲状腺结节风险评估和临床决策指导中...甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统(thyroid imaging reporting and data system,TI-RADS)是根据超声影像学特征对甲状腺结节恶性风险进行分层的参考依据。目前,国内外尚无统一的TI-RADS,不同的TI-RADS在甲状腺结节风险评估和临床决策指导中的价值尚不明确。本文解读和分析了2017年发布的美国放射学院(American College of Radiology,ACR)TI-RADS、2011年发布的Kwak TI-RADS与2020年发布的中国TIRADS(Chinese-TI-RADS,C-TI-RADS)对甲状腺结节风险的评估价值和临床指导意义,旨在为在临床实践中选择较适合的TI-RADS提供参考依据。展开更多
Background： One of the main aims of the updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 （PI-RADS v2） is to diminish variation in the interpretation and reporting of prostate imaging, especially among r...Background： One of the main aims of the updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 （PI-RADS v2） is to diminish variation in the interpretation and reporting of prostate imaging, especially among readers with varied experience levels. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze diagnostic consistency and accuracy for prostate disease among six radiologists with different experience levels from a single center and to evaluate the diagnostic pcrformance of PI-RADS v2 scores in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer （PCa）. Methods： From December 2014 to March 2016, 84 PCa patients and 99 benign prostatic shyperplasia patients who underwent 3.0T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy were included in our study. All patients received evaluation according to the PI-RADS v2 scale （1 5 scores） from six blinded readers （with 6 months and 2, 3, 4, 5, or 17 years of experience, respectively, the last reader was a reviewer/contributor for the PI-RADS v2）. The correlation among the readers＇ scores and the Gleason score （GS） was determined with the Kendall test. lntra-/inter-observer agreement was evaluated using K statistics, while receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve analyses were performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the scores. Results： Based on the PI-RADS v2, the median k score and standard error among all possible pairs of readers were 0.506 and 0.043, respectively： the average correlation between the six readers＇ scores and the GS was positive, exhibiting weak-to-moderate strength （r = 0.391, P = 0.006）. The AUC values of the six radiologists were 0.883, 0.924, 0.927, 0.932, 0.929, and 0.947, respectively. Conclusion： The inter-reader agreement for the PI-RADS v2 among the six readers with different experience is weak to moderate. Different experience levels affect the interpretation of MRI images.展开更多
文摘甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统(thyroid imaging reporting and data system,TI-RADS)是根据超声影像学特征对甲状腺结节恶性风险进行分层的参考依据。目前,国内外尚无统一的TI-RADS,不同的TI-RADS在甲状腺结节风险评估和临床决策指导中的价值尚不明确。本文解读和分析了2017年发布的美国放射学院(American College of Radiology,ACR)TI-RADS、2011年发布的Kwak TI-RADS与2020年发布的中国TIRADS(Chinese-TI-RADS,C-TI-RADS)对甲状腺结节风险的评估价值和临床指导意义,旨在为在临床实践中选择较适合的TI-RADS提供参考依据。
文摘Background： One of the main aims of the updated Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 （PI-RADS v2） is to diminish variation in the interpretation and reporting of prostate imaging, especially among readers with varied experience levels. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze diagnostic consistency and accuracy for prostate disease among six radiologists with different experience levels from a single center and to evaluate the diagnostic pcrformance of PI-RADS v2 scores in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer （PCa）. Methods： From December 2014 to March 2016, 84 PCa patients and 99 benign prostatic shyperplasia patients who underwent 3.0T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before biopsy were included in our study. All patients received evaluation according to the PI-RADS v2 scale （1 5 scores） from six blinded readers （with 6 months and 2, 3, 4, 5, or 17 years of experience, respectively, the last reader was a reviewer/contributor for the PI-RADS v2）. The correlation among the readers＇ scores and the Gleason score （GS） was determined with the Kendall test. lntra-/inter-observer agreement was evaluated using K statistics, while receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve analyses were performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the scores. Results： Based on the PI-RADS v2, the median k score and standard error among all possible pairs of readers were 0.506 and 0.043, respectively： the average correlation between the six readers＇ scores and the GS was positive, exhibiting weak-to-moderate strength （r = 0.391, P = 0.006）. The AUC values of the six radiologists were 0.883, 0.924, 0.927, 0.932, 0.929, and 0.947, respectively. Conclusion： The inter-reader agreement for the PI-RADS v2 among the six readers with different experience is weak to moderate. Different experience levels affect the interpretation of MRI images.
