Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy

, Volume 40, Issue 4, pp 389–393 | Cite as

Typology of intravesical prostatic protrusions, or so-called median lobes, in middle-aged and older men

  • Marie Audouin
  • Alexis Girshovich
  • Olivier Cussenot
  • Raphaele Renard-Penna
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Changes related to prostatic ageing include an increase of prostate volume and morphologic distortions of the prostatic edges in middle-aged and older men. These changes of the prostate exhibit a certain level of heterogeneity, which is clinically obvious for surgeons, radiologists, and anatomists, and which can be explained by the complex nature of the embryologic/anatomic development of the prostate. While the etiology of the median lobe has typically been attributed to a growth and protrusion of the prostatic area at the top of the utricle, we argue that this is not necessarily the case as intravesical protrusions of the prostate have also been observed laterally and anteriorly to the bladder neck, suggesting the involvement of other prostatic zones, thereby highlighting the need to refine the concept of the median lobe.

Material

The current study examined a large series of 478 prostate magnetic resonance imaging scans (MRIs). Intravesical prostatic protrusions were classified, based on their topography: anterior (A), posterolateral (P), and dual (D). Data were analyzed using MedCalc®11.6.1.1.0 software. Pearson’s correlations with coefficients (r) and P values were calculated for the patient’s age, prostate volume, and IVPP size.

Results

An intravesical prostatic protrusion was observed in 27% of cases, with type A occurring in 18% (3% isolated), type P in 96% (81% isolated), and type D in 15%.

Conclusion

The new insights regarding the variability in prostate anatomy will contribute to the improved management of prostate hypertrophy by radiologists and surgeons.

Keywords

Prostate anatomy MRI Elderly 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Aaron L, Franco OE, Hayward SW (2016) Review of prostate anatomy and embryology and the etiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Clin N Am 43:279–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.04.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albarran J, Halle N (1900) Hypertrophie et Néoplasies épithéliales de la prostate. Ann Mal Org G Genito Urin (Paris) 17:113Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benoit G, Jardin A, Gillot C (1993) Reflections and suggestions on the nomenclature of the prostate. Surg Radiol Anat 15:325–332CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC et al (1984) The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol 132:474–479CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Assis AM, Maciel MS, Moreira AM, de Paula Rodrigues VC, Antunes AA, Srougi M, Cerri GG, Carnevale FC (2017) Prostate zonal volumetry as a predictor of clinical outcomes for prostate artery embolization. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 40:245–251.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-016-1518-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gil-Vernet JM (1996) Prostate cancer: anatomical and surgical considerations. Br J Urol 78:161–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guneyli S, Ward E, Peng Y, Nehal Yousuf A, Trilisky I, Westin C, Antic T, Oto A (2016) MRI evaluation of benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with international prostate symptom score. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:917–925.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25418 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jo JK, Hong SK, Byun SS, Zargar H, Autorino R, Lee SE (2016) Urinary continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the impact of intravesical prostatic protrusion. Yonsei Med J 57:1145–1151.  https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2016.57.5.1145 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee CH, Ha HK (2014) Intravesical prostatic protrusion as a predictor of early urinary continence recovery after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 21:653–656.  https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.12419 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loeb S, Kettermann A, Carter HB, Ferrucci L, Metter EJ, Walsh PC (2009) Prostate volume changes over time: results from the Baltimore longitudinal study of aging. J Urol 182:1458–1462.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.047 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lowsley OS (1912) The development of human prostate gland with referenceto the development of other structures at the neck of urinary bladder. Am J Anat 13:299–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNeal JE (1968) Regional morphology and pathology of the prostate. Am J Clin Pathol 49:347–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swyer GI (1944) Post-natal growth changes in the human prostate. J Anat 78:130–145PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Villers A, Steg A, Boccon-Gibod L (1991) Anatomy of the prostate: review of the different models. Eur Urol 20:261–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Williams AM, Simon I, Landis PK et al (1999) Prostatic growth rate determined from MRI data: age-related longitudinal changes. J Androl 20:474–480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zaffagnini V (1963) Considerations on several cases of fibromyoadenoma of the anterior lobe of the prostate, alone or associated with fibromyoadenoma of the lateral lobe and the median lobes. Arch Ital Anat Istol Patol 37:269–296PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UPMCParisFrance

Personalised recommendations