Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume 34, Issue 7 , Pages 1025-1032, July 2008

The Utility of Transrectal Real-Time Elastography in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer

Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

Received 24 July 2007; received in revised form 22 November 2007; accepted 2 December 2007. published online 13 February 2008.

Abstract 

The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of transrectal real-time elastography (TRTE) to differentiate benign from malignant prostatic lesions, with pathologic diagnosis obtained by prostatic needle biopsy. Conventional gray scale transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and power Doppler ultrasonography (PDUS) were performed in 107 men who had elevated serum prostate-specific antigen level >4 ng/mL or abnormal findings on digital rectal examination. For baseline TRUS and PDUS imaging, the suspicion of carcinoma was scored using previously proposed five-point subjective scale. For TRTE imaging, we used newly adopted five-point subjective scale based on the degree and distribution of strain in relation to hypoechoic area, which simultaneously displayed on B-mode image. All patients underwent transperineal systematic 8-cores biopsies, as well as up to four cores of targeted biopsy from suspicious area by TRUS, PDUS and/or TRTE. The samples were diagnosed pathologically and compared with the findings of TRUS, PDUS and TRTE. Prostate cancer was detected in 40 (37%) of 107 patients. When a cutoff point of 3 (displaying focal asymmetric lesion without strain not related to hypoechoic lesion) was used, TRTE had 68% sensitivity, 81% specificity and 76% accuracy. TRTE was comparable with PDUS (70% sensitivity, 75% specificity and 73% accuracy) and had significantly higher sensitivity than TRUS (68% vs. 50%, p = 0.027). Combination of TRTE with PDUS increased sensitivity to 78%. The detection rate of directed biopsy from suspicious area in either TRTE or PDUS (TRTE+PDUS–directed biopsy) was 29% (31/107) by patient and was comparable with systematic biopsy (31%, 33/107, p = 0.86), whereas the detection rate of TRTE+PDUS–directed biopsy by core (55/111, 50%) was significantly higher than systematic biopsy (132/856, 15%, p < 0.0001). For assessing prostatic lesions, TRTE with B-mode image-based scoring had almost the same diagnostic performance as PDUS. Although TRTE+PDUS–directed biopsy detected comparable number of cancers with systematic biopsy, both techniques should be used supplementarily for minimizing the number of missing cancers. (E-mail: kamoi@koto.kpu-m.ac.jp)

Key Words: Ultrasound, Power Doppler, Elastography, Prostatic neoplasms

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0301-5629(07)00621-7

doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.12.002

Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume 34, Issue 7 , Pages 1025-1032, July 2008