Journals / Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

Review of transrectal ultrasonography findings in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Radiopathological correlation

Prostat kanseri tanısında transrektal ultrasonografi bulgularının gözden geçirilmesi: Radyolojik ve patolojik bulguların karşılaştırılması

Pages
31–35
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Similar to the nodule targeted biopsies; the accuracy of the presented study can be evaluated with a prospective study including a larger number of biopsy specimens in case of peripheral zone heterogenity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose:To overview transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy cases and to evaluate the potentially useful sonographic criteria for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods:Between January 2003 and June 2005, TRUS guided prostate biopsy specimens were obtained from 129 patients with a gray zone PSA level (4 - 10 ng/dl; average PSA: 6.9 ± 2.7 ng/dl).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Similar to the nodule targeted biopsies; the accuracy of the presented study can be evaluated with a prospective study including a larger number of biopsy specimens in case of peripheral zone heterogenity.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2003 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose:To overview transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy cases and to evaluate the potentially useful sonographic criteria for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods:Between January 2003 and June 2005, TRUS guided prostate biopsy specimens were obtained from 129 patients with a gray zone PSA level (4 - 10 ng/dl; average PSA: 6.9 ± 2.7 ng/dl). TRUS findings were compared with pathology results. Peripheral zone echostructure (homogenous or heterogeneous) and prostate contours (smooth or irregular) were classified subjectively. Presence of a hypoechoic nodule in the peripheral zone was noted, additional samples were obtained from the nodules.Results:44 patients (34%) were found to have prostate adenocarcinoma. A statistically significant relationship was found between the peripheral zone echostructure - presence of hypoechoic nodule in the peripheral zone and pathological results (p=0.000 and 0.007, respectively). Prostate cancer detection rate increased 7 folds [Odds Ratio (OR): 7.06 (2.98-16.70) 95% Confidence Interval (CI)] when the peripheral zone was heterogeneous and 3 folds [OR: 2.73 (1.18-6.28)95%CI] when there was a hypoechoic nodule in the peripheral zone.Conclusion:TRUS has a limited role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and is especially used for biopsy guidance. On the other hand, the results of this study reveal a significant increase in cancer detection rate when the mentioned TRUS findings are present. Similar to the nodule targeted biopsies; the accuracy of the presented study can be evaluated with a prospective study including a larger number of biopsy specimens in case of peripheral zone heterogenity.

Özet

Amaç:Transrektal ultrasonografi (TRUS) eşliğinde prostat biyopsisi yapılan hastaları gözden geçirmek ve prostat kanseri tanısında yardımcı olabilecek ultrasonografik kriterleri degerlendirmek. Yöntem:Ocak 2003-Temmuz 2005 tarihleri arasında TRUS eşliğinde prostat biyopsisi alınan ve PSA değerleri gri zonda yer alan (410 ng/dl; ortalama PSA: 6.9 ± 2.7 ng/dl) 129 hasta retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. TRUS bulguları patoloji sonuçlarıyla karşılaştırıldı. Periferik zon ekoyapısı (homojen ya da heterojen) ve prostat bezi konturları (düzgün ya da düzensiz) subjektif olarak sınıflandı.Bulgular:44 hasta (% 34) prostat kanseri tanısı aldı. İncelenen kriterlerden periferik zon ekoyapısı ile periferik zonda hipoekoik nodül varlığının patoloji sonuçlarıyla istatistiksel olarak anlamlı biçimde ilişkili olduğu saptandı (p=0.000 ve p=0.007). Prostat kanseri yakalama olasılığının, periferik zonun heterojen olduğu durumda 7 kat [Odds Oranı (OO): 7.06 (2.98-16.70) % 95 Güven Aralığı (GA)], periferik zonda hipoekoik nodül varlığında ise 3 kat [OO: 2.73 (1.18-6.28)%95 GA] arttığı görüldü.Sonuç:Prostat kanseri tanısında TRUS'nin yeri sınırlıdır ve daha çok biyopsi kılavuzu olarak kullanılır. Bununla birlikte, bu çalışmanın sonuçları bahsedilen TRUS bulgularının varlığında kanser yakalama olasılığının anlamlı biçimde arttığını ortaya koymaktadır. Nodüle yönelik biyopsi protokollerine benzer şekilde heterojen periferik zon varlığında alınan biyopsi örneklerinin sayısının artırılmasına dayanan bir çalışma planı ile sunulan çalışmanın geçerliliği değerlendirilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAŞKIN, F., ÜNSAL, A., KARAMAN, C. Z., METEOĞLU, İ., UZ, B. (2022). Review of transrectal ultrasonography findings in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Radiopathological correlation. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 31–35. https://ajindex.com/articles/429039

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, et al. Cancer statistics 2003.CA Cancer J Clin 2003
  2. 526 2) Potosky AL, Miller BA,Albertson PC, Kramer BS. The role increasing detection in the rising incidence of prostate cancer.JAMA 1995
  3. 552 3) Rifkin MD, Choi H. Implications of small, peripheral hypoechoic lesions in endorectal US of the prostate. Radiology 1988
  4. 61922 4) Lee F, Littrup PJ, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: comparison of transrectal ultrasound and the digital rectal examination. Radiology 1988
  5. 38994. 5) Clements R. Ultrasound of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2001
  6. 211925. 6) Chodak GW, Wald V, Parmer E, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of prostatic cancer. J Urol 1986
  7. Lee F, Torp-Pedersen ST, Siders DB, et al. Transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis and staging of prostatic carcinoma. Radiology 1989
  8. 60915. 8) Oyen R, Van Poppel H, Vandevoorde W. The significance of focal hypoechoic lesions in the peripheral zone of the prostate. J Belge Radiol 1995
  9. Sibley RI, Sibley AF. Correlation of digital rectal examination, prostate specific antigen and transrectal ultrasound in prostate carcinoma in AfricanAmericans. J Natl Med Assoc 1997
  10. 31823. 10) Philip J, Roy SD, Ballal M, Foster CS, Javle P. Is a digital examination necessary in the diagnosis and clinical stging of early prostate cancer? BJU Int 2005
  11. 971 11) Newman JS, Bree RL, Rubin JM. Prostate cancer: diagnosis with colour Doppler sonography with histologic correlation of each biopsy site. Radiology 1995
  12. Cornud F, Belin X, Piron D. Color Doppler guided prostate biopsies in 591 patients with an elevated serum PSA level: Impact on gleason score for nonpalpable lesions. Urology 1997
  13. 70915. 13) Cho JY, Kim SH, Lee SE. Peripheral hypoechoic lesions of the prostate: Evaluation with color and power Doppler ultrasound. Eur Urol 2000
  14. Takahashi S, Yamada Y, Homma Y. Power Doppler ultrasonography-directed prostate biopsy in men with elevated serumPSAlevels.Adult Urol 2002
  15. 24852. 15) Sakarya ME,Arslan H, Unal O, et al. The role of power Doppler US in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a preliminary study. BJU 1998
  16. Kelly IMG, Leea WR, Rickards D. Prostate cancer and the role of color Doppler US. Radiology 1993
  17. Frauscher F, Klauser A, Halpern EJ, et al. Detection of prostate cancer with a microbubble ultrasound contrast a