Accurate Determination of Prostate Size Via Digital Rectal Examination and Transrectal Ultrasound

Urology ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 19-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus G Roehrborn
Urology ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 548-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus G. Roehrborn ◽  
Cynthia J. Girman ◽  
Thomas Rhodes ◽  
Karen A. Hanson ◽  
Gerald N. Collins ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alon Lazarovich ◽  
Gil Raviv ◽  
Yael Laitman ◽  
Orith Portnoy ◽  
Orit Raz ◽  
...  

Introduction: We aimed to compare systematic biopsies (SBs) of in-bore magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy (MRGpB) with those performed under transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guidance in the clinical setting. Methods: Data on all 161 consecutive patients undergoing prostate biopsy in our institution between November 2017 and July 2019 were retrospectively collected. The patients were referred to biopsy due to elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination and/or at least one Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) lesion score of ≥3 on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). We included patients with PSA levels ≤20 ng/ml and those with 8–12 core biopsies. Histology results of SBs performed by in-bore MRGpB were compared to TRUS SBs. Chi-squared, Fischer’s exact, and multivariate Pearson regression tests were used for statistical analysis (SPSS, IBM Corporation). Results: In total, 128 patients were eligible for analysis. Their median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] 61.5–72), mean prostate size 55±29 cc, and mean PSA and PSA density levels 7.6±3.5 ng/ml and 0.18±0.13 ng/ml/cc, respectively. Thirty-five patients (27.3%) had suspicious digital rectal examination findings. Both biopsy groups were similar for these parameters. Thirty-eight (62.3%) MRGpB patients had a previous biopsy vs. 5 (7.1%) TRUS-SB patients (p<0.0001). The number of patients diagnosed with clinically significant and non-significant disease was similar for both groups. High-risk disease was more prevalent in the TRUS-SB group (22.4% vs. 4.9%, p<0.01). Conclusions: Our data suggest that in-bore MRGpB is no better than TRUS for guiding SBs for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.


1997 ◽  
pp. 902-906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Smith ◽  
Peter T. Scardino ◽  
Martin I. Resnick ◽  
Alberto D. Hernandez ◽  
Steven C. Rose ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 361-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
David RH Christie ◽  
Jane Windsor ◽  
Christopher F Sharpley

Objective: There are many important clinical scenarios in which estimates of the volume of the prostate gland can have an influence on clinical decisions. The digital rectal examination is the simplest and most readily available method for measuring it. It is commonly performed numerous times every day by practising urologists and radiation oncologists. The prostate gland volume is the most studied parameter arising from it. Although reported in many heterogeneous studies, the accuracy of the digital rectal examination in measuring the volume has never been reviewed. Our aim was to conduct the world’s first systematic review. Methods: Articles from the literature were included if they compared the digital rectal examination with more accurate measures including fluid displacement after radical prostatectomy and transrectal ultrasound measurements. Results: Nineteen articles describing 7891 patients were reviewed and summarised. Wide variations were noted but most studies provided correlation coefficients that lay between 0.3 and 0.7. For those studies that did not involve special training in volume estimation or were not conducted by a urologist with a special interest in the correlation, the coefficients were below 0.6. For eight studies that analysed the estimated volume as a categorical variable, concordance was described using a variety of statistical tests but was generally high. Conclusions: The reported correlations were weak to moderate strength indicating that the digital rectal examination may not be accurate enough when quantitative measurements are required. However, enlargement of the prostate was detectable with high levels of concordance, indicating that the digital rectal examination is effective for that purpose. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.


1992 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-55
Author(s):  
M. Moretti ◽  
A. Cichero ◽  
P. Pittaluga ◽  
M. Varaldo ◽  
Aldo V. Bono ◽  
...  

PSA is commonly used in diagnosing prostate cancer but it lacks both specificity and sensitivity; PSA values rise in benign prostatic affections and up to 30% prostate cancers show normal PSA values. Preliminary reports indicate that PSA DENSITY (PSAD), i.e. PSA/prostate-volume ratio, can improve specificity of PSA in diagnosing prostate cancer. We considered PSAD in 55 patients of 160 observed for prostatism: all of them underwent digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasound and multiple biopsies of the gland. We found cancer in 19 patients (PSAD ranging from 0.17 to 1.77, with a mean value of 0.45), 26 prostatic hyperplasia (PSAD from 0.003 to 0.75, with a mean of 0.13), 6 dysplasia (PSAD from 0.07 to 0.30, with a mean of 0.19). In our experience PSAD > 0.17 or mean value > 0.45 indicate cancer in the absence of significant digital rectal examination and ultrasound findings or normal and borderline PSA values.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document