Article

Prostate volume measurement by TRUS using heights obtained by transaxial and midsagittal scanning: comparison with specimen volume following radical prostatectomy.

Department of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Korean Journal of Radiology (Impact Factor: 1.56). 01/2000; 1(2):110-3. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2000.1.2.110
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to determine, when measuring prostate volume by TRUS, whether height is more accurately determined by transaxial or midsagittal scanning.
Sixteen patients who between March 1995 and March 1998 underwent both preoperative TRUS and radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer were included in this study. Using prolate ellipse volume calculation (height x length x width x pi/6), TRUS prostate volume was determined, and was compared with the measured volume of the specimen.
Prostate volume measured by TRUS, regardless of whether height was determined transaxially or midsagittally, correlated closely with real specimen volume. When height was measured in one of these planes, a paired t test revealed no significant difference between TRUS prostate volume and real specimen volume (p =.411 and p =.740, respectively), nor were there significant differences between the findings of transaxial and midsagittal scanning (p =.570). A paired sample test, however, indicated that TRUS prostate volumes determined transaxially showed a higher correlation coefficient (0.833) and a lower standard deviation (9.04) than those determined midsagittally (0.714 and 11.48, respectively).
Prostate volume measured by TRUS closely correlates with real prostate volume. Furthermore, we suggest that when measuring prostate volume in this way, height is more accurately determined by transaxial than by midsagittal scanning.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
50 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Accurate prostate volume estimation is useful for calculating prostate-specific antigen density and in evaluating posttreatment response. In the clinic, prostate volume estimation involves modeling the prostate as an ellipsoid or a spheroid from transrectal ultrasound, or T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, this requires some degree of manual intervention, and may not always yield accurate estimates. In this article, we present a multifeature active shape model (MFA) based segmentation scheme for estimating prostate volume from in vivo T2-weighted MRI. We aim to automatically determine the location of the prostate boundary on in vivo T2-weighted MRI, and subsequently determine the area of the prostate on each slice. The resulting planimetric areas are aggregated to yield the volume of the prostate for a given patient. Using a set of training images, the MFA learns the most discriminating statistical texture descriptors of the prostate boundary via a forward feature selection algorithm. After identification of the optimal image features, the MFA is deformed to accurately fit the prostate border. An expert radiologist segmented the prostate boundary on each slice and the planimetric aggregation of the enclosed areas yielded the ground truth prostate volume estimate. The volume estimation obtained via the MFA was then compared against volume estimations obtained via the ellipsoidal, Myschetzky, and prolated spheroids models. We evaluated our MFA volume estimation method on a total 45 T2-weighted in vivo MRI studies, corresponding to both 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla field strengths. The results revealed that the ellipsoidal, Myschetzky, and prolate spheroid models overestimated prostate volumes, with volume fractions of 1.14, 1.53, and 1.96, respectively. By comparison, the MFA yielded a mean volume fraction of 1.05, evaluated using a fivefold cross-validation scheme. A correlation with the ground truth volume estimations showed that the MFA had an r(2) value of 0.82, whereas the clinical volume estimation schemes had a maximum value of 0.70. Our MFA scheme involves minimal user intervention, is computationally efficient and results in volume estimations more accurate than state of the art clinical models.
    Academic radiology 06/2011; 18(6):745-54. · 2.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of bent distortion of the image of the prostate on the accuracy of 3-dimensional measurements during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). METHODS: TRUS images were obtained prospectively from 60 patients with prostate cancer. The degree of rectal compression on the probe was varied in each case to obtain a typical bent distortion image (BDI) and a minimally bent image (MBI). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) served as the reference. Axial and midsagittal BDI, MDI, and MRI were selected. Three-dimensional prostate diameters (height, width, and length) and volume were obtained from all images by 2 independent observers. The data were analyzed by using a paired t test, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: The MBI and BDI diameters differed significantly (P <.001). All ICCs for the MBI diameters and volume and the ICCs for BDI length and volume exceeded 0.9, which indicates high measurement reliability. However, the ICCs for BDI height and width were below 0.9. When the difference in MBI or BDI relative to MRI was calculated for each variable, the MBI differences were all significantly smaller than the BDI differences (P <.001). CONCLUSION: Bent distortion during TRUS affects the accuracy of measurements. MBI is also morphologically more realistic than BDI. Therefore, to minimize prostatic image distortion, the rectal probe should be placed so that the posterior wall of the prostate is as flat as possible.
    Urology 01/2013; · 2.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Benign prostatic hyperplasia is a common disease of ageing men worldwide. Though transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) is the standard in most parts of the world in evaluation of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), it is rarely done in some less developed countries because of non availability of appropriate probes and or specialists. Transabdominal ultrasonography (TAUS) remains the mainstay in these areas. Some controversies still exist in literature about the accuracy of TAUS evaluation of prostatic volume in patients with BPH. This study aimed at comparing the transition zone volume estimation of the prostate on transrectal and transabdominal ultrasound with post-operative enucleated adenoma volume in Nigeria patients with BPH and to suggest better predictor of prostate volume in evaluation of BPH.
    The Pan African medical journal. 01/2013; 16:149.

Full-text

View
0 Downloads
Available from