2017Urological ScienceOpen access

Analysis of transrectal and suprapubic ultrasonography for prostate size evaluation

Kuo-Kang Feng, I‐Ni Chiang, Chao‐Yuan Huang, Yeong‐Shiau Pu

Open full text 4 citations

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the correlation between suprapubic ultrasonography (SPUS) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in the measurements of prostate dimensions and volume. Materials and methods A total of 90 patients presenting with prostate enlargement and lower urinary tract symptoms were enrolled. All SPUS and TRUS were performed by a single experienced urologist at the same clinic visit. We analyzed the correlations of prostate volume measured by SPUS and TRUS using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Data were further analyzed in the subgroups to determine the correlation between uroflowmetry, prostate volume, postvoid residue, and prostate specific antigen level and the presence of intravesical growth. Results The mean prostate volume of the 90 patients measured by SPUS and TRUS were 65.8 ± 46.5 mL and 65.4 ± 43.9 mL, respectively ( r = 0.944; p < 0.001). The anteroposterior diameters had the strongest correlation among dimension measurements ( r = 0.874; p < 0.001). SPUS and TRUS measurements had better correlation in the prostate size larger than 50 mL. Conclusion There was a strong correlation of prostate sizes measured by SPUS and TRUS. We believe that SPUS can be a reliable alternative for TRUS, especially in the patients with anal diseases. It can shorten the examination time and make the patient more comfortable.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the correlation between suprapubic ultrasonography (SPUS) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in the measurements of prostate dimensions and volume. Materials and methods A total of 90 patients presenting with prostate enlargement and lower urinary tract symptoms were enrolled. All SPUS and TRUS were performed by a single experienced urologist at the same clinic visit. We analyzed the correlations of prostate volume measured by SPUS and TRUS using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Data were further analyzed in the subgroups to determine the correlation between uroflowmetry, prostate volume, postvoid residue, and prostate specific antigen level and the presence of intravesical growth. Results The mean prostate volume of the 90 patients measured by SPUS and TRUS were 65.8 ± 46.5 mL and 65.4 ± 43.9 mL, respectively ( r = 0.944; p < 0.001). The anteroposterior diameters had the strongest correlation among dimension measurements ( r = 0.874; p < 0.001). SPUS and TRUS measurements had better correlation in the prostate size larger than 50 mL. Conclusion There was a strong correlation of prostate sizes measured by SPUS and TRUS. We believe that SPUS can be a reliable alternative for TRUS, especially in the patients with anal diseases. It can shorten the examination time and make the patient more comfortable.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the correlation between suprapubic ultrasonography (SPUS) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in the measurements of prostate dimensions and volume. Materials and methods A total of 90 patients presenting with prostate enlargement and lower urinary tract symptoms were enrolled. All SPUS and TRUS were performed by a single experienced urologist at the same clinic visit. We analyzed the correlations of prostate volume measured by SPUS and TRUS using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Data were further analyzed in the subgroups to determine the correlation between uroflowmetry, prostate volume, postvoid residue, and prostate specific antigen level and the presence of intravesical growth. Results The mean prostate volume of the 90 patients measured by SPUS and TRUS were 65.8 ± 46.5 mL and 65.4 ± 43.9 mL, respectively ( r = 0.944; p < 0.001). The anteroposterior diameters had the strongest correlation among dimension measurements ( r = 0.874; p < 0.001). SPUS and TRUS measurements had better correlation in the prostate size larger than 50 mL. Conclusion There was a strong correlation of prostate sizes measured by SPUS and TRUS. We believe that SPUS can be a reliable alternative for TRUS, especially in the patients with anal diseases. It can shorten the examination time and make the patient more comfortable.

Key concepts: Medicine, Transrectal ultrasonography, Prostate, Ultrasonography, Urology, Correlation coefficient, Correlation, Lower urinary tract symptoms

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Analysis of transrectal and suprapubic ultrasonography for prostate size evaluation — Research Paper | ScholarLens