How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review

Table 2

Summary of articles measuring the PGV by CT.

First author,; Year of publication,; Country	Number of patients,; Age	CT Imaging details; Mean volume	Reference method; Mean volume	Reference details	Correlation; data	Concordance; Data and over/under estimation	Other; comments	Scores for Bias (0-2); and; Quality (0-4)
Varkarakis [26] 2013; Greece	60 pts, Mean 64 yrs	EC,; Mean 54 cc	Displacement of fresh specimen, Mean 45 cc	SV and vas removed	NS	Overestimated PGV	Also used TRUS and SPUS, CT larger and less accurate	B2; Q2
Kilic [28]; 2014 Turkey	163 pts, Mean age 64 yrs	EC,; Mean 63 mL	Fresh weights, Mean 55 gm	SV included; SGF applied	ICC 0.78	Overestimated on average by 15%, better agreement for larger PGV	Also used TRUS and SPUS, CT larger than both p<0.001	B2; Q2

Pts: patients, Yrs: years of age, TRUS: transrectal ultrasound, SPUS: suprapubic ultrasound, EC: ellipsoid calculation, PC: planimetric calculation, NS: not stated, SV: seminal vesicles, ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient, and SGF: specific gravity factor (1.05 g/mL).