Sandhu S, Moore CM, Chiong E et al (2021) Prostate cancer. Lancet 398:1075–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00950-8

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ahmed HU, El-ShaterBosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Purysko AS, Baroni RH, Giganti F et al (2021) PI-RADS version 2.1: a critical review, from the AJR special series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 216:20–32. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.20.24495

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sathianathen NJ, Omer A, Harriss E et al (2020) Negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in the prostate imaging reporting and data system era: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 78:402–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Park KJ, Choi SH, Lee JS et al (2020) Risk stratification of prostate cancer according to PI-RADS® version 2 categories: meta-analysis for prospective studies. J Urol 204:1141–1149. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001306

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Mazzone E, Stabile A, Pellegrino F et al (2021) Positive predictive value of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 4:697–713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.12.004

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Westphalen AC, McCulloch CE, Anaokar JM et al (2020) Variability of the positive predictive value of PI-RADS for prostate MRI across 26 centers: experience of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Prostate Cancer Disease-focused Panel. Radiology 296:76–84. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020190646

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Barrett T, Ghafoor S, Gupta RT et al (2022) Prostate MRI qualification: AJR expert panel narrative review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 219:691–702. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.22.27615

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Stabile A, Giganti F, Rosenkrantz AB et al (2020) Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions. Nat Rev Urol 17:41–61. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-019-0212-4

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Barrett T, Lee K-L, de Rooij M, Giganti F (2024) Update on optimization of prostate MR imaging technique and image quality. Radiol Clin North Am 62:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2023.06.006

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Panebianco V, Giganti F, Kitzing YX et al (2018) An update of pitfalls in prostate mpMRI: a practical approach through the lens of PI-RADS v. 2 guidelines. Insights Imaging 9:87–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0578-x

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Noureldin M, Eldred-Evans D, Khoo CC et al (2021) Review article: MRI-targeted biopsies for prostate cancer diagnosis and management. World J Urol 39:57–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03182-3

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cata E, Andras I, Ferro M et al (2020) Systematic sampling during MRI-US fusion prostate biopsy can overcome errors of targeting—prospective single center experience after 300 cases in first biopsy setting. Transl Androl Urol 9:2510–2518. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1001

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hsieh P-F, Li P-I, Lin W-C et al (2023) Learning curve of transperineal MRI/US fusion prostate biopsy: 4-year experience. Life (Basel) 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13030638

Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB et al (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 40:244–252. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000530

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Barrett T, de Rooij M, Giganti F et al (2023) Quality checkpoints in the MRI-directed prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Nat Rev Urol 20:9–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-022-00648-4

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

de Rooij M, Israël B, Tummers M et al (2020) ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists’ training. Eur Radiol 30:5404–5416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06929-z

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Barrett T, Padhani AR, Patel A et al (2021) Certification in reporting multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: recommendations of a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int 127:304–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15285

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Serrao EM, Barrett T, Wadhwa K et al (2015) Investigating the ability of multiparametric MRI to exclude significant prostate cancer prior to transperineal biopsy. Can Urol Assoc J 9:853. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2895

Article  Google Scholar 

Giganti F, Allen C, Emberton M et al (2020) Prostate Imaging Quality (PI-QUAL): a new quality control scoring system for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate from the PRECISION trial. Eur Urol Oncol 3:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.007

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS (2014) Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:109–120. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.10699

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Karanasios E, Caglic I, Zawaideh JP, Barrett T (2022) Prostate MRI quality: clinical impact of the PI-QUAL score in prostate cancer diagnostic work-up. Br J Radiol 95. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20211372

Windisch O, Benamran D, Dariane C et al (2023) Role of the prostate imaging quality PI-QUAL score for prostate magnetic resonance image quality in pathological upstaging after radical prostatectomy: a multicentre European study. Eur Urol Open Sci 47:94–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.11.013

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Brembilla G, Lavalle S, Parry T et al (2023) Impact of prostate imaging quality (PI-QUAL) score on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at biopsy. Eur J Radiol 164:110849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110849

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Pötsch N, Rainer E, Clauser P et al (2022) Impact of PI-QUAL on PI-RADS and cancer yield in an MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy population. Eur J Radiol 154:110431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110431

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Caglic I, Barrett T (2019) Optimising prostate mpMRI: prepare for success. Clin Radiol 74:831–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.12.003

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Arnoldner MA, Polanec SH, Lazar M et al (2022) Rectal preparation significantly improves prostate imaging quality: assessment of the PI-QUAL score with visual grading characteristics. Eur J Radiol 147:110145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110145

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Slough RA, Caglic I, Hansen NL et al (2018) Effect of hyoscine butylbromide on prostate multiparametric MRI anatomical and functional image quality. Clin Radiol 73:216.e9-216.e14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.07.013

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Caglic I, Hansen NL, Slough RA et al (2017) Evaluating the effect of rectal distension on prostate multiparametric MRI image quality. Eur J Radiol 90:174–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.02.029

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hansen NL, Koo BC, Gallagher FA et al (2017) Comparison of initial and tertiary centre second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate prior to repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol 27:2259–2266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4635-5

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ecke TH, Schwaiger D, Nesterov G et al (2021) Comparison of initial and second opinion reads of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate for transperineal template-guided biopsies with MRI-Ultrasound fusion. Urol Oncol 39:781.e1-781.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.01.008

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Borofsky S, George AK, Gaur S et al (2018) What are we missing? False-negative cancers at multiparametric MR imaging of the prostate. Radiology 286:186–195. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017152877

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Truong M, Feng C, Hollenberg G et al (2018) A comprehensive analysis of cribriform morphology on magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy correlated with radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 199:106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.07.037

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kim JY, Kim SH, Kim YH et al (2014) Low-risk prostate cancer: the accuracy of multiparametric MR imaging for detection. Radiology 271:435–444. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13130801

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Langer DL, van der Kwast TH, Evans AJ et al (2008) Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2—sparse versus dense cancers. Radiology 249:900–908. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2493080236

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Schmid FA, Lieger L, Saba K et al (2023) Therapy decisions after diagnosis of prostate cancer in men with negative prostate MRI. Prostate 83:56–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24435

Article  CAS  PubMed