» Articles » PMID: 36152871

MRI Vs Transrectal Ultrasound to Estimate Prostate Volume and PSAD: Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection

Overview
Journal Urology
Specialty Urology
Date 2022 Sep 24
PMID 36152871
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To compare multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) to estimate prostate volume and prostate specific antigen density (PSAD) as well as subsequent impact on prostate cancer (PCa) detection.

Methods: Patients referred for mpMRI prior to mpMRI-TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy between 2015 and 2020 were identified. Volume and calculated PSAD by mpMRI and TRUS were compared. Associations with presence of any PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa; Gleason ≥3 + 4) were evaluated using linear regression (interaction by volume quartile), logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristics.

Results: Among 640 men, TRUS underestimated prostate volume relative to mpMRI (median 49.2cc vs. 54.1cc) with 8% lower volume per cc up to 77.5cc (First-third quartile) and 39% lower volume per additional cc above 77.5cc (fourth quartile). For men undergoing radical prostatectomy, mpMRI had a higher correlation coefficient relative to TRUS (0.913 vs 0.878) when compared to surgical pathology. mpMRI PSAD had slightly higher odds vs TRUS PSAD for detecting any PCa (OR 2.94 and OR 2.78, both P <.001) or csPCa (OR 4.20 and OR 4.02, both P <.001). AUC improvements were of borderline significance for mpMRI vs. TRUS PSAD for any PCa (0.689 vs 0.675, P = .05) and not significant for csPCa (0.732 vs 0.722, P = .20). PSAD was not associated with PCa detection for prostates ≥77.5cc.

Conclusion: TRUS underestimates prostate volume relative to mpMRI. PSAD based on mpMRI may be better associated with detection of PCa compared to TRUS, but utility of PSAD may be limited for larger prostates.

Citing Articles

Screening for prostate cancer: evidence, ongoing trials, policies and knowledge gaps.

Bratt O, Auvinen A, Arnsrud Godtman R, Hellstrom M, Hugosson J, Lilja H BMJ Oncol. 2025; 2(1):e000039.

PMID: 39886507 PMC: 11203092. DOI: 10.1136/bmjonc-2023-000039.


Impact of Discordance Between Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Ultrasound Volume Measurements on Prostate Fusion Biopsy Outcomes.

Borde T, Varble N, Hazen L, Saccenti L, Garcia C, Digennaro M J Urol. 2024; 213(4):428-436.

PMID: 39657598 PMC: 11888895. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004368.


The value of adjusted PSAD in prostate cancer detection in the Chinese population.

Wang F, Fu M, Tang Y, Li J Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1462997.

PMID: 39416462 PMC: 11479861. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1462997.


The impact of prostate volume estimation on the risk-adapted biopsy decision based on prostate-specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging score.

Baudewyns A, Guenzel K, Halinski A, Dariane C, Delavar G, Anract J World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):322.

PMID: 38747982 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04962-x.


The Impact of Prostate Volume on Prostate Cancer Detection: Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Transrectal Ultrasound in Biopsy-naïve Men.

Ye J, Zhang C, Zheng L, Wang Q, Wu Q, Tu X Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024; 64:1.

PMID: 38694877 PMC: 11059338. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.04.001.