Comparison of transrectal ultrasound prostatic volume estimation with magnetic resonance imaging volume estimation and surgical specimen weight in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

J Clin Ultrasound. 1996 May;24(4):169-74. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199605)24:4<169::AID-JCU2>3.0.CO;2-D.

Abstract

There are relatively few reports in the literature comparing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in estimating the volume of the prostate in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In this study, we compared volumes determined by TRUS with MRI and TRUS-estimated weights with surgical specimen weights. The main findings of this study were (a) TRUS and MRI measurement of prostate volumes are quite similar; and (b) TRUS underestimates (by 10%) the prostatic weight as determined from the surgical specimens. A better volume estimate can thus be obtained by multiplying the TRUS measurement by a factor of 1.10. We conclude that because TRUS is cheap, user-friendly, noninvasive, and equally as accurate as MRI, it should be the preferred modality in the follow-up of BPH patients.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Male
  • Organ Size
  • Prostate / diagnostic imaging
  • Prostate / pathology*
  • Prostatectomy
  • Prostatic Hyperplasia / diagnosis*
  • Prostatic Hyperplasia / diagnostic imaging
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Ultrasonography