Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Littrup, P.
Right arrow Articles by Kane, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Littrup, P.
Right arrow Articles by Kane, R.

Radiology, Vol 179, 49-53, Copyright © 1991 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Determination of prostate volume with transrectal US for cancer screening. Part II. Accuracy of in vitro and in vivo techniques

PJ Littrup, CR Williams, TK Egglin and RA Kane
Department of Radiology, New England Deaconess Hospital, Boston, MA.

Improved diagnostic information is obtained when prostate volume is correlated with results of prostate-specific antigen assays for early detection of prostate cancer. Three commonly used prostate volume measurement techniques were analyzed: planimetry, prolate ellipse volume calculation (HWL), and an ellipsoid volume measurement technique. For in vitro volume measurement, the declining order of accuracy was planimetry, HWL, and ellipsoid techniques. At the 95% confidence level, inverse prediction produced full-range values for a 40-cm3 model of 5.7, 16.0, 28.8, and 32.8 cm3 for planimetry, HWL, and the two ellipsoid techniques, respectively. Despite its superior accuracy, planimetry is not available on most ultrasound units, increases estimated clinical scanning time, requires additional equipment, and is difficult for a sole operator to perform. Although less accurate than planimetry, HWL is a rapid volume measurement technique that appears to be more accurate than ellipsoid software packages; its universal availability makes it practical for routine clinical use.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
E. J. Halpern, F. Frauscher, S. E. Strup, L. N. Nazarian, P. O'Kane, and L. G. Gomella
Prostate: High-Frequency Doppler US Imaging for Cancer Detection
Radiology, October 1, 2002; 225(1): 71 - 77.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. H. Cha, F. T. Lee Jr., J. M. Gurney, B. K. Markhardt, T. F. Warner, F. Kelcz, and D. M. Mahvi
CT Versus Sonography for Monitoring Radiofrequency Ablation in a Porcine Liver
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2000; 175(3): 705 - 711.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1991 by the Radiological Society of North America.