What is the best radiological method to predict the actual weight of the prostate?

Kılıç, Metin; Özdemır, Ahmet; Altinova, Serkan; Atmaca, Ali Fuat; Canda, Abdullah Erdem; Balbay, Mevlana Derya

doi:10.3906/sag-1205-33

Cited by 10 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two articles included both US and CT imaging methods, and these appear in both Tables 1 and 2 [26, 28]. Four articles included both US and MRI imaging methods, in three of these articles both imaging methods were compared with the reference standard, so all three articles appear in both Tables 1 and 3 [20, 22, 29].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review

Christie

Sharpley

2019

Prostate Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. The measurement of the volume of the prostate gland can have an influence on many clinical decisions. Various imaging methods have been used to measure it. Our aim was to conduct the first systematic review of their accuracy. Methods. The literature describing the accuracy of imaging methods for measuring the prostate gland volume was systematically reviewed. Articles were included if they compared volume measurements obtained by medical imaging with a reference volume measurement obtained after removal of the gland by radical prostatectomy. Correlation and concordance statistics were summarised. Results. 28 articles describing 7768 patients were identified. The imaging methods were ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging (US, CT, and MRI). Wide variations were noted but most articles about US and CT provided correlation coefficients that lay between 0.70 and 0.90, while those describing MRI seemed slightly more accurate at 0.80-0.96. When concordance was reported, it was similar; over- and underestimation of the prostate were variably reported. Most studies showed evidence of at least moderate bias and the quality of the studies was highly variable. Discussion. The reported correlations were moderate to high in strength indicating that imaging is sufficiently accurate when quantitative measurements of prostate gland volume are required. MRI was slightly more accurate than the other methods.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They were published between 1995 and 2016 and included a total of 4792 patients. All of these used TRUS, but two also used SPUS [26, 28]. The correlation coefficients most commonly fell in the range of 0.70-0.90, indicating high levels of correlation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review

Christie

Sharpley

2019

Prostate Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, studies were carried out by calculating PVs with both ellipsoid and bullet (height × width × length × 5µ/24) formulas in MRI examination. However, in recent years, with the introduction of multiparametric prostate MRI, comparative studies have been carried out with both other examinations and other PV computational methods (Bezinque et al, 2018;Chernyak et al, 2015;Kilic et al, 2014;Lee & Chung, 2007). the ellipsoid formula for multiparametric prostate MRI in their study (Jeong et al, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which is the best radiological imaging method for predicting actual prostate weight?

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many studies were completed on plant response to grazing and determination of indicators (Wilson et al 1988;Tamzen et al 2003;Bashari 2006;Unal et al 2013). Many vegetation scientists (Smith, 1988;Bosch, 1989;Wikeem and Pitt 1991;Tamzen et al 2003) have recently improved the understanding of vegetation change in the world grassland, and interpreted some of the changes within a historical framework of rangeland use (Smith, 1988;Jameson, 1988;Friedel, 1991;Laycock, 1991;David et al 2002;Bestelmeyer and Herrick 2004;Herrick et al 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For examples, Inam-ur-Rahim and Maselli (2004) pointed out that indicators play a fundamental role in sustainable development as pointers to reveal conditions and trends in development, and to guide users and planners in making decisions about rangeland use. In additionally, van der Westhuizen et al (2005) said that indicator species are used for rangeland condition assessment. Moreover, Inam-ur-Rahim and Maselli (2004) defined indicators that are likely to be sufficiently widespread or common to have potential in spatially or environmentally disparate locations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Indicator Species and Ecological Degradation Model for Condition Assessment in Turkey

Ünal¹,

Şahin²,

Urla³

et al. 2017

Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring of vegetation change is essential to detect good management practices for the sustainable use of natural rangeland resources. An understanding of how the existing species in vegetation react to management methods is important for decision makers. For this reason, the vegetation changes should be determined by suitable techniques. The multivariate analysis as Detrended Correspondence Analysis and Principal Components Analysis was highly examined and its results were easily interpreted to draw conclusions. A relatively homogenous data set first, a matrix of 221 species and 44 sample sites in the province of Yozgat in the Central Anatolia Region in year 2010, was used by detrended correspondence analysis (DCA). The effects of environmental variation was minimized by this method (DCA) so that the major pattern of vegetation composition change was explained by grazing impact. Principal components analysis was performed to detect the distribution of sites along the first axis, and the distance off the x-axis. Fifteen species out of the promising 89 plant species were found to be indicators. These indicator species should be benefited for the vegetation change status and sustainable rangeland management under semiarid rangeland conditions. The fifteen plant species and bare ground showed clear responses along the first axis (grazing impact gradient), and became abundant over certain ranges of this axis.

show abstract

What is the best radiological method to predict the actual weight of the prostate?

Cited by 10 publications

References 30 publications

How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review

How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review

Which is the best radiological imaging method for predicting actual prostate weight?

The Use of Indicator Species and Ecological Degradation Model for Condition Assessment in Turkey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About