Sean F Mungovan1,2,3, Henk B Luiting2,4, Petra L Graham5, Jaspreet S Sandhu6, Oguz Akin7, Lewis Chan8,9, Manish I Patel8,10. 1. a Westmead Private Physiotherapy Services, Westmead Private Hospital Sydney , Australia. 2. b The Clinical Research Institute , Sydney , Australia. 3. c Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences , The University of Melbourne , Melbourne , Australia. 4. d Faculty of Medical Sciences , University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands. 5. e Department of Statistics , Macquarie University , Australia. 6. f Urology Service, Department of Surgery , Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center , New York. 7. g Department of Radiology , Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center , New York. 8. h Discipline of Surgery , Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney , Australia. 9. i Department of Urology , Concord Hospital , Sydney , Australia. 10. j Department of Urology , Westmead Hospital , Sydney , Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare preoperative membranous urethral length (MUL) measurements using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with two-dimensional transperineal ultrasound imaging (TPUS) in two supine positions on two separate days in men prior to radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MUL was prospectively measured in 18 male volunteers using MRI and on two separate occasions in two different patient positions using TPUS; the patient supine with the knees extended (Supine) and supine with the knees flexed to 70 degrees (Supine KF). Agreement between TPUS and MRI measurements of MUL was assessed using Bland-Altman method comparison techniques and a two-way mixed-effects single measures intraclass correlation (ICC). Test-retest reliability was assessed using a two-way random effects single measures ICC. RESULTS: The mean difference in MUL measurements between MRI and i) TPUS Supine was -0.8 mm (95% limits of agreement (LOA): -3.2, 1.7) and ii) TPUS Supine KF was -0.8mm (95% LOA: -3.5, 1.9). ICC indicated a point estimate of excellent agreement between MRI and TPUS Supine ICC 0.93 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.98) and TPUS Supine KF ICC 0.91 (95%CI 0.79, 0.97). There was excellent agreement between TPUS Supine and TPUS Supine KF (ICC 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99) with a mean difference of 0.3mm (95% LOA: -1.2 to 1.3mm). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MUL can be reliably measured using TPUS and demonstrates excellent agreement with MRI measurements of MUL. TPUS provides clinicians with an accessible non-invasive alternative to MRI for the measurement of MUL that can be used in outpatient urological settings and for patients where MRI is contraindicated.
OBJECTIVE: To compare preoperative membranous urethral length (MUL) measurements using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with two-dimensional transperineal ultrasound imaging (TPUS) in two supine positions on two separate days in men prior to radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MUL was prospectively measured in 18 male volunteers using MRI and on two separate occasions in two different patient positions using TPUS; the patient supine with the knees extended (Supine) and supine with the knees flexed to 70 degrees (Supine KF). Agreement between TPUS and MRI measurements of MUL was assessed using Bland-Altman method comparison techniques and a two-way mixed-effects single measures intraclass correlation (ICC). Test-retest reliability was assessed using a two-way random effects single measures ICC. RESULTS: The mean difference in MUL measurements between MRI and i) TPUS Supine was -0.8 mm (95% limits of agreement (LOA): -3.2, 1.7) and ii) TPUS Supine KF was -0.8mm (95% LOA: -3.5, 1.9). ICC indicated a point estimate of excellent agreement between MRI and TPUS Supine ICC 0.93 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.98) and TPUS Supine KF ICC 0.91 (95%CI 0.79, 0.97). There was excellent agreement between TPUS Supine and TPUS Supine KF (ICC 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99) with a mean difference of 0.3mm (95% LOA: -1.2 to 1.3mm). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MUL can be reliably measured using TPUS and demonstrates excellent agreement with MRI measurements of MUL. TPUS provides clinicians with an accessible non-invasive alternative to MRI for the measurement of MUL that can be used in outpatient urological settings and for patients where MRI is contraindicated.
Authors: Ryan E Stafford; James A Ashton-Miller; Chris Constantinou; Geoff Coughlin; Nicholas J Lutton; Paul W Hodges Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2015-03-01 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Christian von Bodman; Kazuhito Matsushita; Caroline Savage; Mika P Matikainen; James A Eastham; Peter T Scardino; Farhang Rabbani; Oguz Akin; Jaspreet S Sandhu Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-01-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Steven Milanese; Susan Gordon; Petra Buettner; Carol Flavell; Sally Ruston; Damien Coe; William O'Sullivan; Steven McCormack Journal: Man Ther Date: 2014-06-04
Authors: Sean F Mungovan; Sigrid V Carlsson; Gregory C Gass; Petra L Graham; Jaspreet S Sandhu; Oguz Akin; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Manish I Patel Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 14.432