Background Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) became recognised in investigating those with suspected prostate cancer between 2010 and 2012; in the USA, the preventative task force moratorium on PSA screening was a strong catalyst. In a few short years, it has been adopted into daily urological and oncological practice. The pace of clinical uptake, born along by countless papers proclaiming high accuracy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, has sparked much debate about the timing of mpMRI within the traditional biopsy-driven clinical pathways. There are strongly held opposing views on using mpMRI as a triage test regarding the need for biopsy and/or guiding the biopsy pattern. Objective To review the evidence base and present a position paper on the role of mpMRI in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. Methods A subgroup of experts from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group conducted literature review and face to face and electronic exchanges to draw up a position statement. Results This paper considers diagnostic strategies for clinically significant prostate cancer; current national and international guidance; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI in detection of clinically significant and clinically insignificant neoplasms; the impact of pre-biopsy mpMRI on biopsy strategies and targeting; the notion of mpMRI within a wider risk evaluation on a patient by patient basis; the problems that beset mpMRI including inter-observer variability. Conclusions The paper concludes with a set of suggestions for using mpMRI to influence who to biopsy and who not to biopsy at diagnosis.

Additional Metadata
Keywords Prostate cancer . Magnetic resonance imaging . Biopsy . Risk assessment . Observer variation
Persistent URL,
Journal European Radiology: journal of the European Congress of Radiology
Richenberg, J., Logager, V., Panebianco, V., Rouviere, O, Villeirs, G., & Schoots, I.G. (2019). The primacy of multiparametric MRI in men with suspected prostate cancer. European Radiology: journal of the European Congress of Radiology, 29(12), 6940–6952. doi:10.1007/s00330-019-06166-z