Subscribe to RSS

DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1809318
Diagnostic Value of Multiparametric Transrectal Ultrasound in Patients with Suspected Carcinoma of Prostate: A Tertiary Care Centre Experience
Authors
Abstract
Objectives
To establish the role of grayscale ultrasonography, shear wave elastography (SWE), and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) independently and in combination with multiparametric transrectal ultrasound (mp-TRUS) in detecting peripheral zone prostate cancer (PCa) and to compare the performance of mp-TRUS with multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI), keeping biopsy as the gold standard.
Materials and Methods
Thirty men with clinically suspected PCa were enrolled in this single-center-based prospective study conducted over a period of 1.5 years. All patients underwent mp-MRI, mp-TRUS, and guided biopsy. The mp-MRI and mp-TRUS were conducted and interpreted by two different observers who were blinded to each other's findings. In all patients, biopsy cores were taken from a minimum of 12 predetermined sites with extra cores taken from lesions suspicious on either grayscale ultrasonography, SWE, or CEUS.
Results
Malignancy was detected in 19 of our patients on mp-TRUS-guided biopsy. A total of 386 cores were obtained with a positive biopsy rate of 38%. mp-TRUS gave a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy of 100, 63.63, 82.61, 100, and 86.67%, respectively, while the values for mp-MRI were 94.74, 45.45, 75.00, 83.33, and 76.67%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve for mp-TRUS was 0.818 ± 0.076. This value was higher than that for mp-MRI (0.701 ± 0.083).
Conclusion
Performance of mp-TRUS is comparable to that of mp-MRI in diagnosing peripheral zone PCa. By improving the diagnostic yield of grayscale ultrasonography, mp-TRUS also acts as a great guiding tool for targeted biopsies, especially in patients where no lesions are seen on grayscale imaging.
Keywords
prostatic neoplasms - multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging - biopsy - ultrasonographyNote
This work was previously presented at the ARRS 2021 Annual Conference.
Ethical Approval
Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee.
Patients' Consent
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients for this study.
Publication History
Article published online:
04 June 2025
© 2025. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68 (06) 394-424
- 2 Prostate Cancer-Statistics [Internet]. Cancer.Net. Accessed 2012 at: https://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/prostate-cancer/statistics
- 3 Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R. et al; European Society of Urogenital Radiology. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (04) 746-757
- 4 Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC. et al; PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 2017; 389 (10071): 815-822
- 5 Pinto F, Totaro A, Calarco A. et al. Imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis: present role and future perspectives. Urol Int 2011; 86 (04) 373-382
- 6 Zhao C, Gao G, Fang D. et al. The efficiency of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) using PI-RADS Version 2 in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clin Imaging 2016; 40 (05) 885-888
- 7 Muller BG, Shih JH, Sankineni S. et al. Prostate cancer: interobserver agreement and accuracy with the revised prostate imaging reporting and data system at multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 2015; 277 (03) 741-750
- 8 Mertan FV, Greer MD, Shih JH. et al. Prospective evaluation of the prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2016; 196 (03) 690-696
- 9 Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M. et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (04) 618-629
- 10 Mannaerts CK, Wildeboer RR, Postema AW. et al. Multiparametric ultrasound: evaluation of greyscale, shear wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for prostate cancer detection and localization in correlation to radical prostatectomy specimens. BMC Urol 2018; 18 (01) 98
- 11 Correas J-M, Tissier A-M, Khairoune A. et al. Prostate cancer: diagnostic performance of real-time shear-wave elastography. Radiology 2015; 275 (01) 280-289
- 12 Zhang M, Tang J, Luo Y. et al. Diagnostic performance of multiparametric transrectal ultrasound in localized prostate cancer: a comparative study with magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38 (07) 1823-1830
- 13 Harvey CJ, Pilcher J, Richenberg J, Patel U, Frauscher F. Applications of transrectal ultrasound in prostate cancer. Br J Radiol 2012; 85 (Spec No 1): S3-S17
- 14 Heijmink SWTPJ, Fütterer JJ, Strum SS. et al. State-of-the-art uroradiologic imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Acta Oncol 2011; 50 (Suppl. 01) 25-38
- 15 Hwang SI, Lee HJ, Lee SE, Hong SK, Byun SS, Choe G. Elastographic strain index in the evaluation of focal lesions detected with transrectal sonography of the prostate gland. J Ultrasound Med 2016; 35 (05) 899-904
- 16 Wildeboer RR, Postema AW, Demi L, Kuenen MPJ, Wijkstra H, Mischi M. Multiparametric dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2017; 27 (08) 3226-3234
- 17 Sedelaar JP, van Leenders GJ, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA. et al. Microvessel density: correlation between contrast ultrasonography and histology of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2001; 40 (03) 285-293
- 18 Ji Y, Ruan L, Ren W. et al. Stiffness of prostate gland measured by transrectal real-time shear wave elastography for detection of prostate cancer: a feasibility study. Br J Radiol 2019; 92 (1097): 20180970
- 19 Boehm K, Salomon G, Beyer B. et al. Shear wave elastography for localization of prostate cancer lesions and assessment of elasticity thresholds: implications for targeted biopsies and active surveillance protocols. J Urol 2015; 193 (03) 794-800
- 20 Barr RG, Memo R, Schaub CR. Shear wave ultrasound elastography of the prostate: initial results. Ultrasound Q 2012; 28 (01) 13-20
- 21 Barr RG, Cosgrove D, Brock M. et al. WFUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography: part 5. prostate. Ultrasound Med Biol 2017; 43 (01) 27-48
- 22 Ahmad S, Cao R, Varghese T, Bidaut L, Nabi G. Transrectal quantitative shear wave elastography in the detection and characterisation of prostate cancer. Surg Endosc 2013; 27 (09) 3280-3287
- 23 Woo S, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH. Shear wave elastography for detection of prostate cancer: a preliminary study. Korean J Radiol 2014; 15 (03) 346-355
- 24 Rouvière O, Melodelima C, Hoang Dinh A. et al. Stiffness of benign and malignant prostate tissue measured by shear-wave elastography: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol 2017; 27 (05) 1858-1866

