2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.10.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prostate volume determination: Differential volume measurements comparing CT and TRUS

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, no relationship was found between prostate volume and hormonal levels and AR CAG length, and also dividing KS subjects on the basis of testosterone plasma levels (!10.4 or R10.4 nmol/l), we found no statistical differences in prostate volume between the two considered groups. These findings support the hypothesis that obesity, insulin resistance, and glucose or lipid metabolism might be important for prostate size as well as androgens and/or estrogens (13,22).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Interestingly, no relationship was found between prostate volume and hormonal levels and AR CAG length, and also dividing KS subjects on the basis of testosterone plasma levels (!10.4 or R10.4 nmol/l), we found no statistical differences in prostate volume between the two considered groups. These findings support the hypothesis that obesity, insulin resistance, and glucose or lipid metabolism might be important for prostate size as well as androgens and/or estrogens (13,22).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Prostate volume was calculated using the standard ellipsoid formula (width!height!length! p/6, CV) (22). Intra-observer variability was estimated to be !10%.…”
Section: Prostate Ultrasoundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our study, the estimated weight was always lower than the actual weight with TAUS and TRUS, whereas with CT the estimated weight was higher than the actual prostate weight, except for the group with prostates heavier than 80 g. Kälkner et al compared CT and TRUS prostate volumes of patients who were to be treated with conformal radiotherapy and brachytherapy combination for localized prostate cancer (17). They observed that prostate volumes on CT were 48% greater than the prostate volumes calculated with the TRUS ellipse formula.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 48%
“…In more horizontal sections the anterior-posterior dimension increases, whereas the cranio-caudal size decreases. However, Kälkner et al noted that this cross-sectional angle difference cannot fully explain the variations in size alone (17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In such cases, software-aided volumetric evaluation is necessary. 22,23 This paper presents a complete methodology for registering 3D pre-operative and post-operative CT data sets for assessing their volumetric differences, corresponding to bone augmentation in the alveolar region for the particular sets. Therefore, the purpose of this study is twofold; firstly, to describe the methods and techniques used to automatically align the 3D data and secondly, to define a suitable volumetric assessment scheme in order to quantify and evaluate the difference between the pre-operative and the aligned post-operative data sets.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%