Cargando…

Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the value of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) as a prognostic factor for patients with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients consisted of 71 patients with pT2N0M0 disease following radical prostatectomy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: You, Hyun Wook, Jung, Sae Bin, Jeon, Seung Hyun, Chang, Sung-Goo, Kim, Jin Il, Lim, Ju Won
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Urological Association 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556546/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23362441
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.1.11
_version_ 1782257199960031232
author You, Hyun Wook
Jung, Sae Bin
Jeon, Seung Hyun
Chang, Sung-Goo
Kim, Jin Il
Lim, Ju Won
author_facet You, Hyun Wook
Jung, Sae Bin
Jeon, Seung Hyun
Chang, Sung-Goo
Kim, Jin Il
Lim, Ju Won
author_sort You, Hyun Wook
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the value of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) as a prognostic factor for patients with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients consisted of 71 patients with pT2N0M0 disease following radical prostatectomy between 2002 and 2008. The group with hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 1, whereas the group without hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 2. The presence of hypoechoic lesions on preoperative TRUS was analyzed as a prognostic factor along with several parameters, including preoperative factors and pathologic factors. The biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) rate was compared between the two groups according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients had hypoechoic lesions on TRUS, whereas 36 had no hypoechoic lesions. Preoperative baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. In the univariate analysis, BPFS showed significant differences according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS and the preoperative prostate-specific antigen level. The BPFS rates over the first 24 months were 97.0% in group 1 and 97.1% in group 2; however, the difference in the BPFS rate over 48 months significantly widened to 75.3% compared with 91.7%, respectively. Despite this finding, no significant independent prognostic factor for BPFS was found on multivariate analysis in this patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS may suggest worse prognostic characteristics in pT2 prostate cancer. Further studies involving larger subject populations are needed to corroborate the significance of the presence of hypoechoic lesions as a prognostic factor.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3556546
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher The Korean Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35565462013-01-29 Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer? You, Hyun Wook Jung, Sae Bin Jeon, Seung Hyun Chang, Sung-Goo Kim, Jin Il Lim, Ju Won Korean J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the value of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) as a prognostic factor for patients with localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients consisted of 71 patients with pT2N0M0 disease following radical prostatectomy between 2002 and 2008. The group with hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 1, whereas the group without hypoechoic lesions was labeled group 2. The presence of hypoechoic lesions on preoperative TRUS was analyzed as a prognostic factor along with several parameters, including preoperative factors and pathologic factors. The biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) rate was compared between the two groups according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients had hypoechoic lesions on TRUS, whereas 36 had no hypoechoic lesions. Preoperative baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. In the univariate analysis, BPFS showed significant differences according to the presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS and the preoperative prostate-specific antigen level. The BPFS rates over the first 24 months were 97.0% in group 1 and 97.1% in group 2; however, the difference in the BPFS rate over 48 months significantly widened to 75.3% compared with 91.7%, respectively. Despite this finding, no significant independent prognostic factor for BPFS was found on multivariate analysis in this patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of hypoechoic lesions on TRUS may suggest worse prognostic characteristics in pT2 prostate cancer. Further studies involving larger subject populations are needed to corroborate the significance of the presence of hypoechoic lesions as a prognostic factor. The Korean Urological Association 2013-01 2013-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3556546/ /pubmed/23362441 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.1.11 Text en © The Korean Urological Association, 2013 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
You, Hyun Wook
Jung, Sae Bin
Jeon, Seung Hyun
Chang, Sung-Goo
Kim, Jin Il
Lim, Ju Won
Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title_full Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title_fullStr Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title_full_unstemmed Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title_short Does the Presence of Hypoechoic Lesions on Transrectal Ultrasound Suggest a Poor Prognosis for Patients With Localized Prostate Cancer?
title_sort does the presence of hypoechoic lesions on transrectal ultrasound suggest a poor prognosis for patients with localized prostate cancer?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556546/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23362441
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.1.11
work_keys_str_mv AT youhyunwook doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer
AT jungsaebin doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer
AT jeonseunghyun doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer
AT changsunggoo doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer
AT kimjinil doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer
AT limjuwon doesthepresenceofhypoechoiclesionsontransrectalultrasoundsuggestapoorprognosisforpatientswithlocalizedprostatecancer