Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy

Kamran P. Sajadi, Martha Kennedy Terris, Robert J. Hamilton, Jennifer Cullen, Christopher L. Amling, Christopher J. Kane, Joseph C. Presti, William J. Aronson, Stephen J. Freedland

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Transrectal ultrasound can be used to calculate prostate volume, which has implications for benign and malignant prostate disease. We hypothesized that obesity may represent a technical challenge when performing transrectal ultrasound that decreases the accuracy of estimating prostate volume. Materials and Methods: We examined the records of men with previously untreated prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1995 and 2006 and who were in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume calculations were correlated with radical prostatectomy specimen weight using the Spearman coefficient. We calculated the percent and absolute error, and evaluated the relationship between them and transrectal ultrasound volume, body mass index, age, prostate specific antigen and race using multivariate linear regression. Results: A total of 497 patients with preoperative transrectal ultrasound volume, specimen weight and body mass index data were identified in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume correlated modestly with specimen weights (r = 0.692, p <0.001). The median ± SD absolute error was 9.6 ± 11.4 gm and the median ± SD percent error was 22.9% ± 20.6%. Body mass index was not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p = 0.91 and 0.71, respectively). In addition, patient age, prostate specific antigen and race were not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p >0.05). However, percent error but not absolute error was significantly predicted by transrectal ultrasound volume (p <0.001 and 0.34, respectively). Smaller prostate size was associated with greater percent error, especially when transrectal ultrasound volume was less than 20 cc. Conclusions: Transrectal ultrasound volume correlates with specimen weight but it is an imperfect substitute with significant variation in error. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound depends on measured volume but neither body mass index nor other patient specific variables had a significant impact.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)990-995
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume178
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2007

Fingerprint

Prostate
Body Mass Index
Weights and Measures
Cancer Care Facilities
Prostatectomy
Databases
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Linear Models
Prostatic Neoplasms
Obesity

Keywords

  • obesity
  • prostate
  • prostatic hyperplasia
  • prostatic neoplasms
  • ultrasonography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Sajadi, K. P., Terris, M. K., Hamilton, R. J., Cullen, J., Amling, C. L., Kane, C. J., ... Freedland, S. J. (2007). Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy. Journal of Urology, 178(3), 990-995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049

Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy. / Sajadi, Kamran P.; Terris, Martha Kennedy; Hamilton, Robert J.; Cullen, Jennifer; Amling, Christopher L.; Kane, Christopher J.; Presti, Joseph C.; Aronson, William J.; Freedland, Stephen J.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 178, No. 3, 01.09.2007, p. 990-995.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sajadi, KP, Terris, MK, Hamilton, RJ, Cullen, J, Amling, CL, Kane, CJ, Presti, JC, Aronson, WJ & Freedland, SJ 2007, 'Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy', Journal of Urology, vol. 178, no. 3, pp. 990-995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049
Sajadi, Kamran P. ; Terris, Martha Kennedy ; Hamilton, Robert J. ; Cullen, Jennifer ; Amling, Christopher L. ; Kane, Christopher J. ; Presti, Joseph C. ; Aronson, William J. ; Freedland, Stephen J. / Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy. In: Journal of Urology. 2007 ; Vol. 178, No. 3. pp. 990-995.
@article{03b47b1a65f34798bb8b88a8f933c905,
title = "Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy",
abstract = "Purpose: Transrectal ultrasound can be used to calculate prostate volume, which has implications for benign and malignant prostate disease. We hypothesized that obesity may represent a technical challenge when performing transrectal ultrasound that decreases the accuracy of estimating prostate volume. Materials and Methods: We examined the records of men with previously untreated prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1995 and 2006 and who were in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume calculations were correlated with radical prostatectomy specimen weight using the Spearman coefficient. We calculated the percent and absolute error, and evaluated the relationship between them and transrectal ultrasound volume, body mass index, age, prostate specific antigen and race using multivariate linear regression. Results: A total of 497 patients with preoperative transrectal ultrasound volume, specimen weight and body mass index data were identified in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume correlated modestly with specimen weights (r = 0.692, p <0.001). The median ± SD absolute error was 9.6 ± 11.4 gm and the median ± SD percent error was 22.9{\%} ± 20.6{\%}. Body mass index was not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p = 0.91 and 0.71, respectively). In addition, patient age, prostate specific antigen and race were not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p >0.05). However, percent error but not absolute error was significantly predicted by transrectal ultrasound volume (p <0.001 and 0.34, respectively). Smaller prostate size was associated with greater percent error, especially when transrectal ultrasound volume was less than 20 cc. Conclusions: Transrectal ultrasound volume correlates with specimen weight but it is an imperfect substitute with significant variation in error. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound depends on measured volume but neither body mass index nor other patient specific variables had a significant impact.",
keywords = "obesity, prostate, prostatic hyperplasia, prostatic neoplasms, ultrasonography",
author = "Sajadi, {Kamran P.} and Terris, {Martha Kennedy} and Hamilton, {Robert J.} and Jennifer Cullen and Amling, {Christopher L.} and Kane, {Christopher J.} and Presti, {Joseph C.} and Aronson, {William J.} and Freedland, {Stephen J.}",
year = "2007",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "178",
pages = "990--995",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Body Mass Index, Prostate Weight and Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Volume Accuracy

AU - Sajadi, Kamran P.

AU - Terris, Martha Kennedy

AU - Hamilton, Robert J.

AU - Cullen, Jennifer

AU - Amling, Christopher L.

AU - Kane, Christopher J.

AU - Presti, Joseph C.

AU - Aronson, William J.

AU - Freedland, Stephen J.

PY - 2007/9/1

Y1 - 2007/9/1

N2 - Purpose: Transrectal ultrasound can be used to calculate prostate volume, which has implications for benign and malignant prostate disease. We hypothesized that obesity may represent a technical challenge when performing transrectal ultrasound that decreases the accuracy of estimating prostate volume. Materials and Methods: We examined the records of men with previously untreated prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1995 and 2006 and who were in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume calculations were correlated with radical prostatectomy specimen weight using the Spearman coefficient. We calculated the percent and absolute error, and evaluated the relationship between them and transrectal ultrasound volume, body mass index, age, prostate specific antigen and race using multivariate linear regression. Results: A total of 497 patients with preoperative transrectal ultrasound volume, specimen weight and body mass index data were identified in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume correlated modestly with specimen weights (r = 0.692, p <0.001). The median ± SD absolute error was 9.6 ± 11.4 gm and the median ± SD percent error was 22.9% ± 20.6%. Body mass index was not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p = 0.91 and 0.71, respectively). In addition, patient age, prostate specific antigen and race were not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p >0.05). However, percent error but not absolute error was significantly predicted by transrectal ultrasound volume (p <0.001 and 0.34, respectively). Smaller prostate size was associated with greater percent error, especially when transrectal ultrasound volume was less than 20 cc. Conclusions: Transrectal ultrasound volume correlates with specimen weight but it is an imperfect substitute with significant variation in error. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound depends on measured volume but neither body mass index nor other patient specific variables had a significant impact.

AB - Purpose: Transrectal ultrasound can be used to calculate prostate volume, which has implications for benign and malignant prostate disease. We hypothesized that obesity may represent a technical challenge when performing transrectal ultrasound that decreases the accuracy of estimating prostate volume. Materials and Methods: We examined the records of men with previously untreated prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1995 and 2006 and who were in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume calculations were correlated with radical prostatectomy specimen weight using the Spearman coefficient. We calculated the percent and absolute error, and evaluated the relationship between them and transrectal ultrasound volume, body mass index, age, prostate specific antigen and race using multivariate linear regression. Results: A total of 497 patients with preoperative transrectal ultrasound volume, specimen weight and body mass index data were identified in the Shared-Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. Transrectal ultrasound volume correlated modestly with specimen weights (r = 0.692, p <0.001). The median ± SD absolute error was 9.6 ± 11.4 gm and the median ± SD percent error was 22.9% ± 20.6%. Body mass index was not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p = 0.91 and 0.71, respectively). In addition, patient age, prostate specific antigen and race were not significantly related to absolute or percent error (p >0.05). However, percent error but not absolute error was significantly predicted by transrectal ultrasound volume (p <0.001 and 0.34, respectively). Smaller prostate size was associated with greater percent error, especially when transrectal ultrasound volume was less than 20 cc. Conclusions: Transrectal ultrasound volume correlates with specimen weight but it is an imperfect substitute with significant variation in error. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound depends on measured volume but neither body mass index nor other patient specific variables had a significant impact.

KW - obesity

KW - prostate

KW - prostatic hyperplasia

KW - prostatic neoplasms

KW - ultrasonography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34547679415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34547679415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049

M3 - Article

C2 - 17632170

AN - SCOPUS:34547679415

VL - 178

SP - 990

EP - 995

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 3

ER -