Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Montreal University Hospital Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Division of Urologic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Urology. 2014 Jul;84(1):169-74. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.022.
To report the accuracy of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) to measure prostate size before robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy using the prolate ellipsoid formula and its correlation to the weight of the postoperative prostate specimen, for different prostate size groups.
Preoperative prostate size estimated by TRUS and the weight of postoperative prostate specimens were collected from 440 men undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Patients were grouped according to preoperative prostate size: <30, 30-60, 60-80, and ≥80 g. To evaluate accuracy, the mean absolute percentage of error was used. The mean percentage of error was used to indicate whether the estimation of TRUS had a tendency to overestimate or underestimate prostate size. The correlation between both measurements was analyzed for each size group.
Accuracy of TRUS estimation was associated with increased prostate size. TRUS estimation was more accurate for larger prostates. The mean absolute percentage of error of each group was 38.64% (<30 g), 21.33% (30-60 g), 13.23% (60-80 g), and 14.96% (≥80 g). Correlation followed a similar size-dependent trend, with a stronger r coefficient for larger prostates: 0.174 (<30 g), 0.327 (30-60 g), 0.457 (60-80 g), and 0.839 (≥80 g). Interestingly, smaller prostates were underestimated, whereas larger glands (≥80 g) had a tendency to be overestimated by TRUS.
This study demonstrates that the accuracy of the prolate ellipsoid formula for TRUS varies according to prostate size. Although this formula is fairly accurate for assessing larger prostates, it shows some limitations for smaller prostates. This must be taken into account when evaluating treatment modalities such as transurethral incision of the prostate and brachytherapy.
报告使用前列腺扁长形公式(prolate ellipsoid formula)通过经直肠超声(TRUS)术前测量前列腺体积的准确性,并分析其与术后前列腺标本重量的相关性,同时评估该公式在不同前列腺大小分组中的表现。
本研究共纳入 440 例行机器人辅助前列腺根治性切除术的男性患者。收集其术前 TRUS 测量的前列腺体积和术后前列腺标本的重量。根据术前前列腺体积将患者分为以下几组:<30 g、30-60 g、60-80 g 和≥80 g。采用平均绝对百分比误差评估准确性。平均百分比误差用于指示 TRUS 估计前列腺体积是否存在高估或低估的趋势。分析每组中两种测量方法之间的相关性。
TRUS 估计的准确性与前列腺体积的增加相关。对于较大的前列腺,TRUS 估计更为准确。每组的平均绝对百分比误差分别为 38.64%(<30 g)、21.33%(30-60 g)、13.23%(60-80 g)和 14.96%(≥80 g)。相关性也呈现出相似的大小依赖性趋势,较大的前列腺 r 系数更强:0.174(<30 g)、0.327(30-60 g)、0.457(60-80 g)和 0.839(≥80 g)。有趣的是,较小的前列腺体积存在低估的趋势,而较大的前列腺(≥80 g)则存在被 TRUS 高估的趋势。
本研究表明,前列腺扁长形公式通过 TRUS 测量前列腺体积的准确性随前列腺大小而变化。虽然该公式对于评估较大的前列腺较为准确,但对于较小的前列腺存在一定的局限性。在评估经尿道前列腺切开术和近距离放疗等治疗方式时,需要考虑这一点。