Table 1: Summary of articles measuring the PGV by TRUS in chronological order.

First author,
Year of publication,
Country
Number of patients,
Age
TRUS Imaging details,
Mean volume
Reference method,
Mean volume
Reference method detailsCorrelation
data
Concordance
Data and over/under estimation
Other
comments
Scores for Bias (0-2)
and
Quality (0-4)

Wolff [12] 1995
Germany
25 pts, age NSEC, Mean NSSpecimen weight, SGF applied, mean 36gmSV weight subtractedLinear regression R=0.83
P<0.0001
NSTwo methods of EC compared, NSDB2
Q0

Tewari [13] 1996
USA
48 pts
Age NS
EC
mean 60gm
Weighed after fixation, SGF applied, mean 65 gmSV removedNSStudents t-test p=0.04
PGV was underestimated by about 10%
Also used MRI but not compared with reference.B2
Q1

Matthews [14] 1996 USA100 pts
Age NS
EC
Mean 36mL
Mean 45 mL
EC from measurements
Within 1 hr of excisionNSStudents t-test
P<0.01
PGV was underestimated if <30mL and overestimated if >30mL
B2
Q1

Zlotta [15] 1999
Belgium and Austria
36 pts
Age NS
EC
Mean 29 mL
Weighed
Mean 34 mL
Details NSPearson’s R=0.78
P<0.001
Students t-test p=0.004TZ volume measurement was more accurate than whole prostateB2
Q0

Park [16] 2000
South Korea
16 pts
Mean 62 yrs
EC, mean 30 mL transaxial and 33 mL midsagittalEC from specimen, mean 32 mLWithin 1 hr of excision0.71 Midsagittal
0.83 Transaxial
Method NS
Student’s t-test NSDAP measured in two planes, NSDB2
Q1

Freedland [17] 2005 USA753 pts
Age NS
Details NSWeight, otherwise details NSIncluded SV and vasa tipsSpearman r=0.71
P<0.001
NSFrom a larger study of 1602 RP pts in the SEARCH database, mean age 63 yrs, mean specimen weight 44gmB1
Q1

Loeb [18] 2005
USA
1844 pts
Mean 65 yrs
EC
Mean 40gm
Mean wt 50 gmIncluded SVSpearman’s
R=0.65
PGV was generally underestimated, more accurate with smaller PGVTRUS better than DREB1
Q2

Cabello-Benevente [19] 2006 Spain33 pts
Age NS
EC
Mean 39cc
Weight
54 gm
Details NSPearson r=0.79Student’s t-test
P=0.001
Underestimated by 29%
B2
Q1

Lee [20] 2006 Korea73 pts, age NSEC
Mean 39cc
Fresh weight within 1 hr, SGF applied, mean 37ccSV removedPearson r=0.88
P< 0.001
Overestimated if <35cc, underestimated if >35ccAlso tested MRI, which was more accurateB2
Q4

Sajadi [21] 2007 USA497 pts
Mean 60yrs
EC
Mean 37.4cc
Specimen weight mean 45 gmFresh Weight included SVSpearman’s
R=0.692, p<0.001
Usually underestimatedVA studyB1
Q3

Jeong [22] 2008 Korea21 pts, mean 66 yrsEC, Means 42-51 mLFresh specimen within 1 hr, displacement method, mean 40mLSV removedLinear regression, R=0.90-94Students t-test
P=0.1-<0.001
Axial and midsagittal measurements of AP were compared, axial better for TRUS
Also used MRI with both EC and PC, where Midsagittal and PC most accurateB2
Q3

Rodriguez [23] 2008 USA124 pts
Age NS
EC
Mean NS
Displacement method and weight (together correlated 0.997).Defatted but SV attached.Correlations not given but only 24% within +/- 10%Underestimated wt in all size categoriesNo mean values givenB1
Q2

Acer [24] 2010
Turkey
5 pts
Mean 60 yrs
EC Mean vol 43 ccFluid displacement
Mean 53 cc
SV removedKruskal Wallis
P = 0.677 (NSD)
21% underestimationB2
Q2

Hong [25] 2012
Australia
236 pts
Mean 61 yrs
EC 37 mLWeight post Formalin fixation
46 mL
SV removedSpearman r=0.74Concordance coefficients also provided 0.31-0.46, considered poorAlso performed EC on specimens, median 32 mL, concluded weight more usefulB1
Q3

Varkarakis [26] 2013 Greece60 pts mean 64 yrsBoth TRUS and SPUS Both EC, means 45-50 cc respDisplacement of fresh specimen, mean 45 ccSV and vas removedNSSPUS overestimated PGV, TRUS NSDAlso used CTB2
Q2

Bienz [27] 2014
Canada and USA
440 pts
Age NS
EC
4 Volume categories
Weighed before fixationDetails NSPearson improved with volume r = 0.17-0.84
P= 0.056-<0.01
ANOVA
PGV was underestimated <30 and overestimated >80cc, avg absolute error 39%
Median lobe made no differenceB2
Q3

Kilic [28] 2014 Turkey163 pts, mean age 64 yrsEC
TRUS and SPUS, means 51 and 50 mL respectively
Fresh weights, Mean 55 gmSV included
SGF applied
ICC 0.84-0.90Both TRUS and SPUS underestimated the PGV
TRUS slightly better than SPUS (NSD)
Also used CT, TRUS and SPUS more accurateB2
Q2

Paterson [29] 2016 Canada318 pts
Mean 63 yrs
EC
Mean 39cc
Fluid displacement method. Mean 37ccProstate weight also used (ICC=0.96)ICC 0.74Underestimated on average by 3ccMRI slightly more accurateB1
Q3

Pts: patients, Yrs: years of age, TRUS: transrectal ultrasound, SPUS: suprapubic ultrasound, EC: ellipsoid calculation, PC: planimetric calculation, NS: not stated, VA: Veterans Affairs, SV: seminal vesicles, TZ: transitional zone, MRI: magnetic resonance imaging, CT: computer tomography, AP: anteroposterior, ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient, SGF: specific gravity factor (1.05 g/mL), and SEARCH: shared equal access regional cancer hospital.