Diagnostic value of ultrasonic shear wave elastography for clinically significant prostate cancer.
- Author:
Fang-Rui YANG
1
;
Yong-Hao JI
1
;
Li-Tao RUAN
2
;
Jian-Xue LIU
1
;
Yao-Ren ZHANG
1
;
Xiao ZHANG
1
;
Qin-Yun WAN
1
;
Si-Fan REN
1
Author Information
1. Department of Ultrasonic Medicine, Baoji Central Hospital, Baoji, Shaanxi 721008, China.
2. Department of Ultrasonic Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
prostate cancer;
clinically significant prostate cancer;
shear wave elastography;
stiffness of entire prostate gland;
diagnosis
- MeSH:
Humans;
Male;
Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis*;
Elasticity Imaging Techniques;
Retrospective Studies;
Prostate/pathology*;
Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood*;
Aged;
Middle Aged
- From:
National Journal of Andrology
2025;31(6):505-511
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the diagnostic value of shear wave elastography (SWE) for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).
METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 359 cases with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) in Baoji Central Hospital from June 2017 to July 2023. All the patients underwent the following examinations in the order of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), measurement of the stiffness of the entire prostate gland by SWE, and TRUS-guided prostate puncture biopsy. The stiffness of the entire prostate gland was defined as the average of Young's modulus at both sides of the base, middle, and apex of the prostate, including the maximum Young's modulus (Emax), mean Young's modulus (Emean), and minimum Young's modulus (Emin). We analyzed the correlation of the parameters of the stiffness of the entire prostate gland with the pathological results, focusing on their diagnostic performance for csPCa.
RESULTS:Of the 359 cases, 189 were diagnosed by pathological puncture biopsy as BPH, 26 as non-csPCa, and 144 as csPCa. The PSA level, Emax, Emean and Emin were significantly higher in the csPCa than those in the BPH and non-csPCa groups (all P < 0.01), but showed no statistically significant difference between the BPH and non-csPCa groups (all P > 0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), optimal cut-off value, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of Emax in the diagnosis of csPCa were 0.852, 143.92 kPa, 72.22%, 84.65%, 75.91%, 81.98% and 79.67%; those of Emean were 0.868, 82.42 kPa, 67.36%, 91.16%, 83.62%, 80.66% and 81.62%; and those of Emin were 0.682, 32.73 kPa, 47.22%, 89.30%, 73.91%, 71.54% and 72.14%, respectively. In the non-csPCa group, Emax, Emean and Emin were found below the optimal cut-off value in 73.08% (19/26), 92.31% (24/26) and 88.46% (23/26), respectively.
CONCLUSION:The stiffness of the entire prostate gland measured by SWE contributes to the diagnosis of csPCa, reduces unnecessary detection of non-csPCa, and provides some reference for its active surveillance.
