The calculation of PSA density with transabdominal ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound and computed tomography and its correlation with the PSA density of the radical prostatectomy specimen in patients with prostate cancer

Doctoral Dissertation uoadl:1308369 293 Read counter

Unit:
Τομέας Χειρουργικής
Library of the School of Health Sciences
Deposit date:
2016-05-17
Year:
2016
Author:
Ζαρκαδούλιας Αδάμ
Dissertation committee:
Χαράλαμπος Δεληβελιώτης, Καθηγητής, Μιχαήλ Χρυσοφός, Αναπλ. Καθηγητής, Ανδρέας Σκολαρίκος, Αναπλ. Καθηγητής
Original Title:
Υπολογισμός του PSA density με διακοιλιακό υπερηχογράφημα, διορθικό υπερηχογράφημα και αξονική τομογραφία και συσχέτισή του με το PSA density του παρασκευάσματος ριζικής προστατεκτομής σε ασθενείς με καρκίνο του προστάτη
Languages:
Greek
Translated title:
The calculation of PSA density with transabdominal ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound and computed tomography and its correlation with the PSA density of the radical prostatectomy specimen in patients with prostate cancer
Summary:
Objective: To examine the accuracy of PSA density, calculated with three
different imaging modalities and compared to the PSA density of the radical
prostatectomy specimen.
Patients and methods: The PSA density of 60 men with clinically localized
prostate cancer was calculated with transabdominal ultrasound (TAUS),
transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and computed tomography (CT) before radical
prostatectomy and was compared with the PSA density of the surgical specimen
using the paired t-test. The relationship of the real prostate volume and the
difference between the PSA density calculated with the three imaging modalities
and that of the PSA density of the specimen was analysed using the Pearson’s
correlation coefficient.
Results: The mean difference between the PSA density calculated by each one of
the three imaging modalities and the PSA density of the specimen was -0,01
ng/ml/cm3 (p=0,28) for TAUS, 0,01 ng/ml/cm3 (p=0,37) for TRUS and -0,03
ng/ml/cm3 (p=0,001) for CT. This difference has not been shown to depend on the
real prostate volume (r=0,056, p=0,673 for TAUS, r=-0,014, p=0,917 for TRUS and
r=0,184, p=0,159 for CT). The sensitivity of PSA density calculated with TAUS,
TRUS and CT was 58,3%, 65% and 45% respectively, while that of the specimen was
70%.
Conclusions: Although overall PSA density showed a moderate sensitivity, TRUS
and TAUS are the imaging modalities that calculate it closer to the real PSA
density of the surgical specimen.
Keywords:
PSA density, Transabdominal ultrasound, Tranrectal ultrasound, Computed tomography, Radical prostatectomy
Index:
No
Number of index pages:
0
Contains images:
Yes
Number of references:
392
Number of pages:
VII, 134
document.pdf (2 MB) Open in new window