Literature DB >> 15154528

Color and power Doppler sonography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: comparison between vascular density and total vascularity.

Peter H Arger1, S Bruce Malkowicz, Keith N VanArsdalen, Chandra M Sehgal, Anson Holzer, Susan M Schultz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Advances in color flow Doppler (CFD) and power Doppler imaging (PDI) have potential for prostate cancer diagnosis. Previous reports based on qualitative assessment suggest that hypervascularity increases likelihood of prostate cancer. Our objective was to compare 2 methods of vascularity assessment using PDI: total vascularity (TV) and vascular density (VD). The goal was to determine whether quantitative Doppler vascularity correlates with the likelihood of prostate cancer. Quantitative measurements were compared with subjective visual analysis of images.
METHODS: Ninety patients before biopsy had gray scale sonography, CFD, and PDI. Histologic analysis showed adenocarcinoma, prostate intraepithelial neoplasia, benign prostatic hypertrophy/prostatitis, and benign findings. The CFD and PDI images were analyzed for vascularity by (1) integrating the number of blood vessels over an imaged area (TV) and (2) integrating the number of vessels over a unit area of tissue (VD). Images were also assessed visually. VD, TV, and visual assessment were compared with one another and histologic findings.
RESULTS: Mean volume was not different. In each pathologic group, vascularity extent measured by TV and VD ranged from low to high. Disease groups did not exhibit a substantial difference in vascularity by either quantitative or qualitative analyses. Regionally, central gland TV was not significantly more vascular than peripheral gland TV except in benign prostatic hypertrophy. However, peripheral gland VD was 2.5 times greater than central gland VD. Seventy-one percent of the 31 focal hypoechoic lesions were hypervascular. Only 23% were carcinoma.
CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic categories were not separable by apparent vascular measurement. All pathologic categories showed low, moderate, or high vascularity; thus vascular areas by themselves did not distinguish cancer types, nor did focal hypervascular hypoechoic areas increase the likelihood of cancer. These imaging techniques provided no further resolution of tumor discrimination over multiple biopsies of the prostate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15154528     DOI: 10.7863/jum.2004.23.5.623

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound Med        ISSN: 0278-4297            Impact factor:   2.153


  5 in total

Review 1.  Image guidance for focal therapy of prostate cancer.

Authors:  U Lindner; N Lawrentschuk; J Trachtenberg
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prostate cancer imaging and staging at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) approach.

Authors:  B Nicolas Bloch; Robert E Lenkinski; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.388

3.  Quantitative colour Doppler and greyscale ultrasound for evaluating prostate cancer.

Authors:  Khalid Ashi; Brooke Kirkham; Anil Chauhan; Susan M Schultz; Bonnie J Brake; Chandra M Sehgal
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2020-09-09

4.  Evaluation of Prostatic Lesions by Transrectal Ultrasound, Color Doppler, and the Histopathological Correlation.

Authors:  Sachin Khanduri; Gaurav Katyal; Aakshit Goyal; Saurav Bhagat; Santosh Yadav; Tarim Usmani; Nikita Singh; Mriganki Chaudhary; Shobha Khanduri
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-07-03

Review 5.  Advanced Ultrasound Techniques for Neuroimaging in Pediatric Critical Care: A Review.

Authors:  Colbey W Freeman; Misun Hwang
Journal:  Children (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.