Cargando…

Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlations between prostate volumes estimated by transabdominal, transrectal, and three-dimensional US and the factors affecting the differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prostate volumes of 94 consecutive patients were measured by both transabdominal and transrectal U...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Sun Ho, Kim, Seung Hyup
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Radiological Society 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2627229/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385560
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2008.9.2.134
_version_ 1782163520258834432
author Kim, Sun Ho
Kim, Seung Hyup
author_facet Kim, Sun Ho
Kim, Seung Hyup
author_sort Kim, Sun Ho
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlations between prostate volumes estimated by transabdominal, transrectal, and three-dimensional US and the factors affecting the differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prostate volumes of 94 consecutive patients were measured by both transabdominal and transrectal US. Next, the prostate volumes of 58 other patients was measured by both transrectal and three-dimensional US. We evaluated the degree of correlation and mean difference in each comparison. We also analyzed possible factors affecting the differences, such as the experiences of examiners in transrectal US, bladder volume, and prostate volume. RESULTS: In the comparison of transabdominal and transrectal US methods, the mean difference was 8.4 ± 10.5 mL and correlation coefficient (r) was 0.775 (p < 0.01). The experienced examiner for the transrectal US method had the highest correlation (r = 0.967) and the significantly smallest difference (5.4 ± 3.9 mL) compared to the other examiners (the beginner and the trained; p < 0.05). Prostate volume measured by transrectal US showed a weak correlation with the difference (r = 0.360, p < 0.05). Bladder volume did not show significant correlation with the difference (r = -0.043, p > 0.05). The comparison between the transrectal and three-dimensional US methods revealed a mean difference of 3.7 ± 3.4 mL and the correlation coefficient was 0.924 for the experienced examiner. Furthermore, no significant difference existed between examiners (p > 0.05). Prostate volume measured by transrectal US showed a positive correlation with the difference for the beginner only (r = 0.405, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the prostate volume estimation by US, experience in transrectal US is important in the correlation with transabdominal US, but not with three-dimensional US. Also, less experienced examiners' assessment of the prostate volume can be affected by prostate volume itself.
format Text
id pubmed-2627229
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher The Korean Radiological Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26272292009-02-17 Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US Kim, Sun Ho Kim, Seung Hyup Korean J Radiol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the correlations between prostate volumes estimated by transabdominal, transrectal, and three-dimensional US and the factors affecting the differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prostate volumes of 94 consecutive patients were measured by both transabdominal and transrectal US. Next, the prostate volumes of 58 other patients was measured by both transrectal and three-dimensional US. We evaluated the degree of correlation and mean difference in each comparison. We also analyzed possible factors affecting the differences, such as the experiences of examiners in transrectal US, bladder volume, and prostate volume. RESULTS: In the comparison of transabdominal and transrectal US methods, the mean difference was 8.4 ± 10.5 mL and correlation coefficient (r) was 0.775 (p < 0.01). The experienced examiner for the transrectal US method had the highest correlation (r = 0.967) and the significantly smallest difference (5.4 ± 3.9 mL) compared to the other examiners (the beginner and the trained; p < 0.05). Prostate volume measured by transrectal US showed a weak correlation with the difference (r = 0.360, p < 0.05). Bladder volume did not show significant correlation with the difference (r = -0.043, p > 0.05). The comparison between the transrectal and three-dimensional US methods revealed a mean difference of 3.7 ± 3.4 mL and the correlation coefficient was 0.924 for the experienced examiner. Furthermore, no significant difference existed between examiners (p > 0.05). Prostate volume measured by transrectal US showed a positive correlation with the difference for the beginner only (r = 0.405, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the prostate volume estimation by US, experience in transrectal US is important in the correlation with transabdominal US, but not with three-dimensional US. Also, less experienced examiners' assessment of the prostate volume can be affected by prostate volume itself. The Korean Radiological Society 2008 2008-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC2627229/ /pubmed/18385560 http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2008.9.2.134 Text en Copyright © 2008 The Korean Radiological Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kim, Sun Ho
Kim, Seung Hyup
Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title_full Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title_fullStr Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title_full_unstemmed Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title_short Correlations between the Various Methods of Estimating Prostate Volume: Transabdominal, Transrectal, and Three-Dimensional US
title_sort correlations between the various methods of estimating prostate volume: transabdominal, transrectal, and three-dimensional us
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2627229/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385560
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2008.9.2.134
work_keys_str_mv AT kimsunho correlationsbetweenthevariousmethodsofestimatingprostatevolumetransabdominaltransrectalandthreedimensionalus
AT kimseunghyup correlationsbetweenthevariousmethodsofestimatingprostatevolumetransabdominaltransrectalandthreedimensionalus