Objectives: Despite disadvantages such as time-consuming and tedious t
o the user, planimetric volumetry is considered to be the most accurat
e method for prostate volume determination. This study investigates th
e possibilities of formula-derived volume determination and reveals th
e best alternative to planimetric volumetry. Methods: The prostate vol
ume is calculated using prostatic dimensions (length, height and width
) in four mathematical descriptions for prostate volume calculations.
As reference, the planimetric results obtained with 4 mm step size wer
e used. Results: Compared to the results of planimetric volumetry obta
ined with 4-mm intersection distance, the best results for volume dete
rmination with mathematical calculation were obtained with a formula d
escribing a spheroid volume using half the mean of width, height and l
ength as radius. Conclusion: Although planimetric volumetry remains th
e most accurate method for prostate volume determination, the spheroid
formula is the best alternative method for quick volume assessment wi
th reasonable accuracy.