How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review.

IF 2.3 Q3 ONCOLOGY Prostate Cancer Pub Date : 2019-03-03 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2019/6932572
David R H Christie, Christopher F Sharpley
{"title":"How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review.","authors":"David R H Christie, Christopher F Sharpley","doi":"10.1155/2019/6932572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The measurement of the volume of the prostate gland can have an influence on many clinical decisions. Various imaging methods have been used to measure it. Our aim was to conduct the first systematic review of their accuracy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The literature describing the accuracy of imaging methods for measuring the prostate gland volume was systematically reviewed. Articles were included if they compared volume measurements obtained by medical imaging with a reference volume measurement obtained after removal of the gland by radical prostatectomy. Correlation and concordance statistics were summarised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>28 articles describing 7768 patients were identified. The imaging methods were ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging (US, CT, and MRI). Wide variations were noted but most articles about US and CT provided correlation coefficients that lay between 0.70 and 0.90, while those describing MRI seemed slightly more accurate at 0.80-0.96. When concordance was reported, it was similar; over- and underestimation of the prostate were variably reported. Most studies showed evidence of at least moderate bias and the quality of the studies was highly variable.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The reported correlations were moderate to high in strength indicating that imaging is sufficiently accurate when quantitative measurements of prostate gland volume are required. MRI was slightly more accurate than the other methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":20907,"journal":{"name":"Prostate Cancer","volume":"2019 ","pages":"6932572"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6420971/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prostate Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6932572","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The measurement of the volume of the prostate gland can have an influence on many clinical decisions. Various imaging methods have been used to measure it. Our aim was to conduct the first systematic review of their accuracy.

Methods: The literature describing the accuracy of imaging methods for measuring the prostate gland volume was systematically reviewed. Articles were included if they compared volume measurements obtained by medical imaging with a reference volume measurement obtained after removal of the gland by radical prostatectomy. Correlation and concordance statistics were summarised.

Results: 28 articles describing 7768 patients were identified. The imaging methods were ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging (US, CT, and MRI). Wide variations were noted but most articles about US and CT provided correlation coefficients that lay between 0.70 and 0.90, while those describing MRI seemed slightly more accurate at 0.80-0.96. When concordance was reported, it was similar; over- and underestimation of the prostate were variably reported. Most studies showed evidence of at least moderate bias and the quality of the studies was highly variable.

Discussion: The reported correlations were moderate to high in strength indicating that imaging is sufficiently accurate when quantitative measurements of prostate gland volume are required. MRI was slightly more accurate than the other methods.

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
前列腺成像如何准确测量前列腺体积?系统审查的结果。
目的:前列腺体积的测量可以对许多临床决策产生影响。已经使用了各种成像方法来测量它。我们的目的是对它们的准确性进行首次系统审查。方法:系统地回顾了描述测量前列腺体积的成像方法准确性的文献。如果将医学成像获得的体积测量值与前列腺根治术切除腺体后获得的参考体积测量值进行比较,则纳入文章。对相关和一致性统计进行了总结。结果:共发现28篇文章,描述7768例患者。成像方法包括超声、计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像(US、CT和MRI)。注意到差异很大,但大多数关于US和CT的文章提供的相关系数在0.70和0.90之间,而那些描述MRI的文章似乎更准确,在0.80-0.96之间。当报告一致性时,情况是相似的;前列腺的高估和低估有不同的报道。大多数研究显示至少存在中度偏倚,研究质量参差不齐。讨论:报告的相关性为中等强度到高强度,表明当需要定量测量前列腺体积时,成像足够准确。MRI比其他方法稍微准确一些。
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
Prostate Cancer
Prostate Cancer ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Prostate Cancer is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a multidisciplinary platform for scientists, surgeons, oncologists and clinicians working on prostate cancer. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to the diagnosis, surgery, radiotherapy, drug discovery and medical management of the disease.
期刊最新文献
Investigating the Relationship of G-137C, C-607A, and A-1447G Polymorphisms in the Promoter of IL-18 and CXCL10 Inflammatory Genes with Prostate Cancer in an Iranian Population. Evaluation of Second-Line Treatment for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer following the Administration of Upfront Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors. Health-Related and Psychosocial Factors Associated with Prostate Cancer Stage at Diagnosis among Males Participating in Alberta’s Tomorrow Project Cognitive Dysfunction in Patients Treated with Androgen Deprivation Therapy: A Multimodality Functional Imaging Study to Evaluate Neuroinflammation. Randomized, Open-Label Phase 2 Study of Apalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy versus Apalutamide Monotherapy versus Androgen Deprivation Monotherapy in Patients with Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.
×
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:481959085
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