Tewari A, Indudhara R, Shinohara K, Schalow E, Woods M, Lee R, Anderson C, Narayan P
Department of Urology, University of California at San Francisco, USA.
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.
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.
在文献中，相对较少有关于在良性前列腺增生（BPH）管理中比较经直肠超声（TRUS）和磁共振成像（MRI）来估计前列腺体积的报道。在本研究中，我们将TRUS测定的体积与MRI测定的体积进行了比较，并将TRUS估计的重量与手术标本重量进行了比较。本研究的主要发现为：（a）TRUS和MRI对前列腺体积的测量相当相似；（b）TRUS低估了（10%）手术标本确定的前列腺重量。因此，将TRUS测量值乘以1.10的系数可以获得更好的体积估计值。我们得出结论，由于TRUS价格便宜、使用方便、无创且与MRI一样准确，它应该是BPH患者随访中的首选方式。
