Display options
Cite
Szopiński T, Nowicki A, Záťura F, et al. Novel trends in transrectal ultrasound imaging of prostate gland carcinoma. J Ultrason. 2014;14(58):306-19doi: 10.15557/JoU.2014.0031.
Szopiński, T., Nowicki, A., Záťura, F., Gołąbek, T., & Chłosta, P. (2014). Novel trends in transrectal ultrasound imaging of prostate gland carcinoma. Journal of ultrasonography, 14(58), 306-19. https://doi.org/10.15557/JoU.2014.0031
Szopiński, Tomasz, et al. "Novel trends in transrectal ultrasound imaging of prostate gland carcinoma." Journal of ultrasonography vol. 14,58 (2014): 306-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.15557/JoU.2014.0031
Szopiński T, Nowicki A, Záťura F, Gołąbek T, Chłosta P. Novel trends in transrectal ultrasound imaging of prostate gland carcinoma. J Ultrason. 2014 Sep;14(58):306-19. doi: 10.15557/JoU.2014.0031. Epub 2014 Sep 30. PMID: 26676141; PMCID: PMC4579691.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Ultrason. 2014 Sep;14(58):306-19. doi: 10.15557/JoU.2014.0031. Epub 2014 Sep 30.

Novel trends in transrectal ultrasound imaging of prostate gland carcinoma.

Journal of ultrasonography

Tomasz Szopiński, Andrzej Nowicki, František Záťura, Tomasz Gołąbek, Piotr Chłosta

Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland.
  2. Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Science, Warsaw, Poland.
  3. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic.

PMID: 26676141 PMCID: PMC4579691 DOI: 10.15557/JoU.2014.0031

Abstract

Carcinoma of the prostate gland is the most common neoplasm in men. Its treatment depends on multiple factors among which local staging plays a significant role. The basic method is transrectal ultrasound imaging. This examination enables imaging of the prostate gland and its abnormalities, but it also allows ultrasound-guided biopsies to be conducted. A conventional gray-scale ultrasound examination enables assessment of the size, echostructure and outlines of the anatomic capsule, but in many cases, neoplastic lesions cannot be observed. For this reason, new sonographic techniques are implemented in order to facilitate detectability of cancer. The usage of contrast agents during transrectal ultrasound examination must be emphasized since, in combination with color Doppler, it facilitates detection of cancerous lesions by visualizing flow which is not observable without contrast enhancement. Elastography, in turn, is a different solution. It uses the differences in tissue elasticity between a neoplastic region and normal prostatic parenchyma that surrounds it. This technique facilitates detection of lesions irrespective of their echogenicity and thereby supplements conventional transrectal examinations. However, the size of the prostate gland and its relatively far location from the transducer may constitute limitations to the effectiveness of elastography. Moreover, the manner of conducting such an examination depends on the examiner and his or her subjective assessment. Another method, which falls within the novel, popular trend of combining imaging methods, is fusion of magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal sonography. The application of multidimensional magnetic resonance imaging, which is currently believed to be the best method for prostate cancer staging, in combination with the availability of a TRUS examination and the possibility of monitoring biopsies in real-time sonography is a promising alternative, but it is associated with higher costs and longer duration of the examination. This paper presents the most important novel trends in transrectal imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis based on the review of the articles available in the PubMed base and published after 2010.

Keywords: TRUS; cancer of the prostate; elastography; neoplasm staging; prostatic neoplasms; transrectal ultrasound

References

  1. BJU Int. 2009 Feb;103(4):458-63 - PubMed
  2. Ultrasonics. 1992 Mar;30(2):95-103 - PubMed
  3. Eur Radiol. 2012 Apr;22(4):746-57 - PubMed
  4. J Urol. 2011 Oct;186(4):1281-5 - PubMed
  5. Int J Urol. 2010 Oct;17 (10 ):855-60 - PubMed
  6. Radiol Technol. 2009 Jul-Aug;80(6):547S-61S - PubMed
  7. Med Phys. 2004 Jun;31(6):1568-75 - PubMed
  8. J Urol. 2012 Mar;187(3):1080-6 - PubMed
  9. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 1999;46(5):1057-67 - PubMed
  10. J Urol. 2005 Jul;174(1):115-7 - PubMed
  11. World J Urol. 2007 Aug;25(4):351-9 - PubMed
  12. Eur J Radiol. 2008 Feb;65(2):304-10 - PubMed
  13. Ultrason Imaging. 1991 Apr;13(2):111-34 - PubMed
  14. Radiology. 2005 Oct;237(1):197-201 - PubMed
  15. J Urol. 1997 Aug;158(2):502-4 - PubMed
  16. Radiology. 1969 Apr;92(5):939-48 - PubMed
  17. Ultrason Imaging. 1998 Oct;20(4):260-74 - PubMed
  18. BJU Int. 2011 Oct;108(8 Pt 2):E217-22 - PubMed
  19. Radiology. 2002 Oct;225(1):71-7 - PubMed
  20. Int J Urol. 2007 Sep;14 (9):811-6 - PubMed
  21. Meat Sci. 1994;36(1-2):239-50 - PubMed
  22. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1970 Sep;110(1):177-83 - PubMed
  23. Invest Radiol. 1968 Sep-Oct;3(5):356-66 - PubMed
  24. Abdom Imaging. 2008 Nov-Dec;33(6):729-35 - PubMed
  25. BJU Int. 2012 Nov;110(10 ):1414-23; discussion 1423 - PubMed
  26. BJU Int. 2012 Jun;109 (11):1620-6 - PubMed
  27. Urology. 2008 Dec;72(6 Suppl):S12-24 - PubMed
  28. Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):125-40 - PubMed
  29. Eur Urol. 2008 Dec;54(6):1354-62 - PubMed
  30. Radiology. 2002 Mar;222(3):634-9 - PubMed
  31. Urology. 1997 Dec;50(6):906-12 - PubMed
  32. Curr Opin Urol. 2007 Jan;17 (1):39-47 - PubMed
  33. BJU Int. 2007 Jul;100(1):47-50 - PubMed
  34. Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):112-7 - PubMed
  35. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Jul;193(1):55-60 - PubMed
  36. Cancer. 2004 Jun 15;100(12):2655-63 - PubMed
  37. Urol Int. 2009;82(3):280-5 - PubMed
  38. Urology. 2013 Jun;81(6):1372-8 - PubMed
  39. Cancer. 2005 Dec 1;104(11):2373-83 - PubMed
  40. Public Health Rep. 2004 Mar-Apr;119(2):174-86 - PubMed
  41. J Urol. 2010 Sep;184(3):913-7 - PubMed
  42. Cancer. 1994 Feb 1;73(3):678-87 - PubMed
  43. J Ultrasound Med. 2009 Apr;28(4):455-60 - PubMed
  44. Radiology. 1994 Jul;192(1):274-8 - PubMed

Publication Types