Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Radiology and Oncology

The Journal of Association of Radiology and Oncology

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 1.681
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.723

CiteScore 2016: 1.70

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.538
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.921


Open Access
Online
ISSN
1581-3207
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 46, Issue 1 (Mar 2012)

Issues

A comparison of virtual touch tissue quantification and digital rectal examination for discrimination between prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia

Xiaozhi Zheng / Ping Ji / Hongwei Mao
  • Department of Ultrasonic Diagnosis, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jianqun Hu
  • Department of Ultrasonic Diagnosis, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2011-07-20 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10019-011-0026-3

A comparison of virtual touch tissue quantification and digital rectal examination for discrimination between prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia

Background. Virtual touch tissue quantification (VTTQ) is a new, promising technique for detecting the stiffness of tissues. The aim of this study is to compare the performance of VTTQ and digital rectal examination (DRE) in discrimination between prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Patients and methods. VTTQ was performed in 209 prostate nodular lesions of 107 patients with BPH and suspected prostate cancer before the prostate histopathologic examination. The shear wave velocity (SWV) at each nodular lesion was quantified by implementing an acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI). The performance of VTTQ and DRE in discrimination between prostate cancer and BPH was compared. The diagnostic value of VTTQ and DRE for prostate cancer was evaluated in terms of the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy.

Results. Prostate cancer was detected in 57 prostate nodular lesions by histopathologic examination. The SWV values (m/s) were significantly greater in prostate cancer and BPH than in normal prostate (2.37 ± 0.94, 1.98 ± 0.82 vs. 1.34 ± 0.47). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for VTTQ (SWV>2.5m/s) to differentiate prostate nodules as benign hyperplasia or malignancy was 0.86, while it was 0.67 for DRE. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were 71.93 %, 87.5 %, 68.33 %, 89.26 %, 83.25 %, respectively for VTTQ (SWV>2.5m/s), whereas they were 33.33 %, 81.57 %, 40.43 %, 76.54 %, 68.42 % respectively for DRE.

Conclusions. VTTQ can effectively detect the stiffness of prostate nodular lesions, which has a significantly higher performance than DRE in discrimination between prostate cancer and BPH.

Keywords: prostate cancer; benign prostatic hyperplasia; virtual touch tissue quantification; digital rectal examination; shear wave velocity

  • Milecki P, Martenka P, Antczak A, Kwias Z. Radiotherapy combined with hormonal therapy in prostate cancer: the state of the art. Cancer Manag Res 2010; 2: 243-53.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, Thompson IM, D'Amico AV, Volk RJ, et al. American Cancer Society Guideline for the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 70-98.Google Scholar

  • Brawley OW, Ankerst DP, Thompson IM. Screening for Prostate Cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2009; 59: 264-73.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wang N, Gerling GJ, Childress RM, Martin ML. Quantifying palpation techniques in relation to performance in a clinical prostate exam. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2010; 14: 1088-97.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Paganin-Gioanni A, Bellard E, Paquereau L, Ecochard V, Golzio M, Teissie J. Fluorescence imaging agents in cancerology. Radiol Oncol 2010; 44: 142-8.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Hodolic M. Role of F-18-choline PET/CT in evaluation of patients with prostate carcinoma. Radiol Oncol 2011; 45: 17-21.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Gallotti A, D'Onofrio M, Pozzi Mucelli R. Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) technique in ultrasound with virtual touch tissue quantification of the upper abdomen. Radiol Med 2010; 115: 889-97.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • D'Onofrio M, Gallotti A, Mucelli RP. Tissue quantification with acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: Measurement repeatability and normal values in the healthy liver. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: 132-6.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Osaki A, Kubota T, Suda T, Igarashi M, Nagasaki K, Tsuchiya A, et al. Shear wave velocity is a useful marker for managing nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 2918-25.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • D'Onofrio M, Gallotti A, Salvia R, Capelli P, Mucelli RP. Acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) ultrasound imaging of pancreatic cystic lesions. Eur J Radiol 2010. [Epub ahead of print] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed [PUBMED]

  • Clevert DA, Stock K, Klein B, Slotta-Huspenina J, Prantl L, Heemann U, et al. Evaluation of Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in renal tumors of unknown etiology in comparison to histological findings. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2009; 43: 95-107.Web of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Zheng XZ, Ji P, Mao HW, Zhang XY, Xia EH, Xing-Gu, et al. A novel approach to assessing the changes in prostatic stiffness with age using virtual touch tissue quantification. J Ultrasound Med 2011; 30: 387-90.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Pedersen K V, Carlsson P, Varenhorst E, Löfman O, Berglund K. Screening for carcinoma of the prostate by digital rectal examination in a randomly selected population. BMJ 1990; 300: 1041-4.Google Scholar

  • Miyanaga N, Akaza H, Yamakawa M, Oikawa T, Sekido N, Hinotsu S, et al. Tissue elasticity imaging for diagnosis of prostate cancer: a preliminary report. Int J Urol 2006; 13: 1514-8.CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Miyagawa T, Tsutsumi M, Matsumura T, Kawazoe N, Ishikawa S, Shimokama T, et al. Real-time elastography for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Evaluation of elastographic moving images. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2009; 39: 394-8.CrossrefWeb of SciencePubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Nightingale K, Soo MS, Nightingale R, Trahey G. Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: in vivo demonstration of clinical feasibility. Ultrasound Med Biol 2002; 28: 227-35.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • D'Onofrio M, Gallotti A, Martone E, Pozzi Mucelli R. Solid appearance of pancreatic serous cystadenoma diagnosed as cystic at ultrasound acoustic radiation force impulse imaging. JOP 2009; 10: 543-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • Krouskop TA, Wheeler TM, Kallel F, Garra BS, Hall T. Elastic moduli of breast and prostate tissues under compression. Ultrason Imaging 1998; 20: 260-74.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article


Published Online: 2011-07-20

Published in Print: 2012-03-01


Citation Information: Radiology and Oncology, ISSN (Online) 1581-3207, ISSN (Print) 1318-2099, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10019-011-0026-3.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Arjit Agarwal, Shubhra Agarwal, and Shruti Chandak
Acta Radiologica, 2017, Page 028418511773068
[2]
YIJIN SU, LIANFANG DU, YING WU, JUAN ZHANG, XUEMEI ZHANG, XIAO JIA, YINGYU CAI, YUNHUA LI, JING ZHAO, and QIAN LIU
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 2013, Volume 5, Number 6, Page 1715
[3]
Sungmin Woo, Chong Hyun Suh, Sang Youn Kim, Jeong Yeon Cho, and Seung Hyup Kim
American Journal of Roentgenology, 2017, Page 1
[4]
Bircan Alan, Mazhar Utangaç, Cemil Göya, and Mansur Dağgülli
Medical Science Monitor, 2016, Volume 22, Page 4523
[5]
Takumi Onoyama, Masahiko Koda, Yuki Fujise, Tomoaki Takata, Soichiro Kawata, Toshiaki Okamoto, Kennichi Miyoshi, Tomomitsu Matono, Takaaki Sugihara, Kazuya Matsumoto, Koichiro Kawaguchi, Kenichi Harada, Kazuo Yashima, and Hajime Isomoto
Clinical Imaging, 2017, Volume 42, Page 64
[6]
Arash Anvari, Richard G. Barr, Manish Dhyani, and Anthony E. Samir
Abdominal Imaging, 2015, Volume 40, Number 4, Page 709
[8]
Chunhui Li, Guangying Guan, Yuting Ling, Ying-Ting Hsu, Shaozhen Song, Jeffrey T-J. Huang, Stephen Lang, Ruikang K. Wang, Zhihong Huang, and Ghulam Nabi
Cancer Letters, 2015, Volume 357, Number 1, Page 121
[9]
Minghua Yao, Jian Wu, Liling Zou, Guang Xu, Juan Xie, Rong Wu, and Huixiong Xu
BioMed Research International, 2014, Volume 2014, Page 1
[10]
Simona Bota, Ioan Sporea, Roxana Sirli, Alina Popescu, Mirela Danila, Ana Jurchis, and Oana Gradinaru-Tascau
European Journal of Radiology, 2014, Volume 83, Number 2, Page 268
[11]
Yoshiko Ariji, Akihiko Gotoh, Yuichiro Hiraiwa, Yoshitaka Kise, Miwa Nakayama, Wataru Nishiyama, Shigemitsu Sakuma, Kenichi Kurita, and Eiichiro Ariji
Oral Radiology, 2013, Volume 29, Number 1, Page 64
[12]
Xiaozhi Zheng, Ping Ji, Hongwei Mao, and Jing Wu
Radiology and Oncology, 2012, Volume 46, Number 2

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in