SONOELASTICITY IMAGING OF PROSTATE-CANCER - IN-VITRO RESULTS

PURPOSE: To compare sonoelasticity imaging versus ultrasound (US) in d etection of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sonoelasticity ima ging and US were performed on 10 prostatectomy specimens in which canc er was detected at previous biopsy. Six patients had no palpable lesio ns at digital rectal examination. Specimens were imaged axially at the apex, middle, and base of the gland to correlate with location of pat hologic sections. All images were interpreted blindly and prospectivel y, and results were compared with pathologic findings. RESULTS: Sensit ivity and specificity with sonoelasticity imaging were 85% and 84%, re spectively, and 30% and 100% with standard US when compared with patho logic findings. Sixty-four percent of pathologically confirmed tumors detected at sonoelasticity imaging were isoechoic on conventional US i mages. CONCLUSION: In this limited study, sonoelasticity imaging was m ore sensitive for tumor detection and more accurate for assessment of tumor location than was conventional US.