Comparative study of standard and small transrectal transducers for prostate ultrasonography.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Ultrasonography Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-30 DOI:10.14366/usg.23084
Sung Il Hwang, Hyungwoo Ahn, Hak Jong Lee, Sung Il Jung
{"title":"Comparative study of standard and small transrectal transducers for prostate ultrasonography.","authors":"Sung Il Hwang,&nbsp;Hyungwoo Ahn,&nbsp;Hak Jong Lee,&nbsp;Sung Il Jung","doi":"10.14366/usg.23084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate pain and image quality associated with the use of two different ultrasound transducers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty healthy male participants aged 30 years or older were prospectively enrolled. All ultrasound procedures were performed using a V8 machine (Samsung Medison, Seoul, Korea) equipped with EA2-11 (conventional) and miniER7 (small-caliber) transrectal transducers, operated by a single genitourinary radiologist. To minimize bias, one group of volunteers underwent ultrasonography with the conventional transducer first, followed by the small transducer. For the remaining participants, the examinations were performed in the opposite order. Ultrasonography, including the measurement of total prostate and transitional zone volumes, was conducted in accordance with standard practice. After testing with both probes, participants were asked to rate their pain on a 10-point numerical rating scale (NRS). A radiologist then evaluated the quality of the images acquired with each probe using a 5-point numeric scale and compared the prostate volume measurements obtained by each method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean NRS scores associated with the conventional and small transducers were 4.7±1.8 and 2.7±1.2, respectively (P<0.05). The mean ultrasound image qualities from the two transducers were statistically similar (4.78 and 4.74, P>0.05). The whole prostate gland volume as measured with the conventional transducer (mean±standard deviation, 24.2±9.1 mL) was greater than the measurement (22.1±8.7 mL) obtained with the small-caliber transducer (P<0.05). However, only two of the 50 whole gland volume measurements differed by more than two standard deviations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of a small transrectal probe significantly reduced pain without compromising image quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":54227,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasonography","volume":" ","pages":"555-560"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a3/81/usg-23084.PMC10555692.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasonography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.23084","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate pain and image quality associated with the use of two different ultrasound transducers.

Methods: Fifty healthy male participants aged 30 years or older were prospectively enrolled. All ultrasound procedures were performed using a V8 machine (Samsung Medison, Seoul, Korea) equipped with EA2-11 (conventional) and miniER7 (small-caliber) transrectal transducers, operated by a single genitourinary radiologist. To minimize bias, one group of volunteers underwent ultrasonography with the conventional transducer first, followed by the small transducer. For the remaining participants, the examinations were performed in the opposite order. Ultrasonography, including the measurement of total prostate and transitional zone volumes, was conducted in accordance with standard practice. After testing with both probes, participants were asked to rate their pain on a 10-point numerical rating scale (NRS). A radiologist then evaluated the quality of the images acquired with each probe using a 5-point numeric scale and compared the prostate volume measurements obtained by each method.

Results: The mean NRS scores associated with the conventional and small transducers were 4.7±1.8 and 2.7±1.2, respectively (P<0.05). The mean ultrasound image qualities from the two transducers were statistically similar (4.78 and 4.74, P>0.05). The whole prostate gland volume as measured with the conventional transducer (mean±standard deviation, 24.2±9.1 mL) was greater than the measurement (22.1±8.7 mL) obtained with the small-caliber transducer (P<0.05). However, only two of the 50 whole gland volume measurements differed by more than two standard deviations.

Conclusion: The use of a small transrectal probe significantly reduced pain without compromising image quality.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
标准和小型经直肠前列腺超声换能器的比较研究。
目的:本研究的目的是评估与使用两种不同的超声换能器相关的疼痛和图像质量。方法:前瞻性地纳入50名年龄在30岁或以上的健康男性参与者。所有超声程序均使用配备EA2-11(常规)和miniER7(小口径)经直肠换能器的V8机器(Samsung Medison,Seoul,Korea)进行,由一名泌尿生殖放射科医生操作。为了最大限度地减少偏差,一组志愿者首先使用传统换能器进行超声检查,然后使用小型换能器。对于其余的参与者,按照相反的顺序进行检查。超声检查,包括前列腺总体积和过渡区体积的测量,是根据标准实践进行的。在用两种探针进行测试后,参与者被要求用10点数字评定量表(NRS)对他们的疼痛进行评分。放射科医生随后使用5点数字量表评估每个探针获得的图像的质量,并比较通过每种方法获得的前列腺体积测量值。结果:常规和小型换能器的NRS评分分别为4.7±1.8和2.7±1.2,传统换能器测量的整个前列腺体积(平均值±标准差,24.2±9.1mL)大于小口径换能器测量的前列腺体积(22.1±8.7mL)(P结论:使用小型经直肠探头在不影响图像质量的情况下显著减轻了疼痛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasonography
Ultrasonography Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.50%
发文量
78
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Ultrasonography, the official English-language journal of the Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine (KSUM), is an international peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to practice, research, technology, and education dealing with medical ultrasound. It is renamed from the Journal of Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine in January 2014, and published four times per year: January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1. Original articles, technical notes, topical reviews, perspectives, pictorial essays, and timely editorial materials are published in Ultrasonography covering state-of-the-art content. Ultrasonography aims to provide updated information on new diagnostic concepts and technical developments, including experimental animal studies using new equipment in addition to well-designed reviews of contemporary issues in patient care. Along with running KSUM Open, the annual international congress of KSUM, Ultrasonography also serves as a medium for cooperation among physicians and specialists from around the world who are focusing on various ultrasound technology and disease problems and relevant basic science.
期刊最新文献
Fully automated frame selection and region-of-interest placement in 2D shear wave elastography: reduced examination time with comparable reproducibility in diffuse liver disease. Predictive US findings for differentiating between malignant and benign thyroid nodules: Doppler and microvascular imaging according to the TI-RADS and pathologic subtypes of malignancy. Prospective evaluation of the safety and efficacy of microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in Korean patients. Ultrasonography in 2026: accelerating progress and defining the future of ultrasound. Ultrasound-based fat quantification: advancing steatosis assessment in the metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease era.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1