Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practical Recommendations for Performing Ultrasound Scanning in the Urological and Andrological Fields

Archives of Italian Urology and Andrology 2014;86,1:56–78

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Atlas of Ultrasonography in Urology, Andrology, and Nephrology

  • 2077 Accesses

Abstract

Aim: US scanning has been defined as the urologist’s stethoscope. These recommendations have been drawn up with the aim of ensuring minimum standards of excellence for ultrasound imaging in urological and andrological practice. A series of essential recommendations are made, to be followed during ultrasound investigations in the kidney, prostate, bladder, scrotal, and penile diseases.

Methods: Members of the Imaging Working Group of the Italian Society of Urology (SIU) in collaboration with the Italian Society of Ultrasound in Urology, Andrology and Nephrology (SIEUN) identified expert urologists, andrologists, nephrologists, and radiologists. The recommendations are based on the review of the literature, previously published recommendations, books, and the opinions of the experts. The final document was reviewed by national experts, including members of the Italian Society of Radiology.

Results: Recommendations are listed in five chapters, focusing on the kidney, bladder, prostate and seminal vesicles, scrotum and testis, and penis, including penile echo Doppler. In each chapter clear definitions are made of indications, technological standards of the devices, and the method of performance of the investigation. The findings to be reported are described and discussed, and examples of final reports for each organ are included. In the tables, the ultrasound features of the principal male urogenital diseases are summarized. Diagnostic accuracy and second-level investigations are considered.

Conclusions: Ultrasound is an integral part of the diagnosis and follow-up of diseases of the urinary system and male genitals in patients of all ages, in both the hospital and outpatient setting. These recommendations are dedicated to enhancing communication and evidence-based medicine in an inter- and multidisciplinary approach. The ability to perform and interpret ultrasound imaging correctly has become an integral part of clinical practice in uro-andrology, but intra- and interobserver variability is a well-known limitation. These recommendations will help to improve reliability and reproducibility in uro-andrological ultrasound scanning.

Coordinators: Pasquale Martino and Andrea Benedetto Galosi

Imaging Group – Società Italiana Urologia (SIU)

In collaboration with the Società Italiana Ecografia Urologica Andrologica Nefrologica (SIEUN)

Reviewers:

Barozzi Libero, Radiologist, Bologna (Società Italiana Radiologia)

Bertolotto Michele, Radiologist, Trieste

Fandella Andrea, Urologist, Treviso

Galosi Andrea Benedetto, Urologist, Fermo, Asur Marche

Martino Pasquale, Urologist, Bari (President of SIEUN, Associate Member of ESUI-EAU)

Rosi Paolo, Radiologist and Urologist, Perugia

Trombetta Carlo, Urologist and Andrologist, Trieste (Member of ESUI-EAU)

Authors:

Bitelli Marco, Urologist and Andrologist, Rome

Consonni Paolo, Urologist, Castellanza (Va)

Fiorini Fulvio, Nephrologist, Rovigo

Granata Antonio, Nephrologist, Agrigento

Gunelli Roberta, Urologist, Forlì

Liguori Giovanni, Urologist and Andrologist, Trieste

Palazzo Silvano, Urologist, Bari

Pavan Nicola, Urologist, Trieste

Scattoni Vincenzo, Urologist, Milan

Virgili Guido, Urologist, Rome

Reprint with permission of Archives of Italian Urology and Andrology

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bevelacqua JJ (2010) Practical and effective ALARA. Health Phys 98 Suppl 2:S39–47

    Google Scholar 

  2. Eeg KR, Khoury AE, Halachmi S, Braga LH, Farhat WA, Bägli DJ, Pippi Salle JL, Lorenzo AJ (2009) Single center experience with application of the ALARA concept to serial imaging studies after blunt renal trauma in children–is ultrasound enough? J Urol 181(4):1834–1840; discussion 1840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rutala WA. Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare: new CDC guidelines, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  4. Velázquez-Estades LJ, Wanger A, Kellaway J, Hardten DR, Prager TC (2005) Microbial contamination of immersion biometry ultrasound equipment. Ophthalmology 112(5):e13–e18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Giornale Italiano di Ecografia (SIUMB Editore) I.R. al vol.8-N4. December 2005: Documento SIUMB per le Linee Guida in Ecografia

    Google Scholar 

  6. AUA (2011) AIUM practice guideline for the performance of an: ultrasound examination in the practice of urology, www.aium.org

  7. Linee guida SIEOG Società Italiana di Ecografia Ostetrico Ginecologica, Edition 2010

    Google Scholar 

Ultrasound Scanning of the Kidney

  1. Griffiths GJ, Cartwright G, McLachlan MSF (1974) Estimation of renal size from radiographs: is the effect worthwhile? Clin Radiol 26:249–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dure-Smith P, McArdle GH (1972) Tomography during excretory urography. Technical aspects. Br J Radiol 45:896–901

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. De Sanctis JT, Connoly SA, Bramson RT (1998) Effect of patient position on sonographically measured renal length in neonates, infants, and children. Am J Roentgenol 170:1381–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones TB, Riddick LR, Harpen J et al (1983) Ultrasonographic determination of renal mass and renal volume. J Ultrasound Med 2:151–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hricak H, Lieto RP (1983) Sonographic determination of renal volume. Radiology 148:311–312

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Partik BL, Stadler A, Schamp S et al (2002) 3D versus 2D ultrasound: accuracy of volume measurement in human cadaver kidneys. Invest Radiol 37:489–495

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brandt TD, Neiman HL, Dragowski MJ et al (1982) Ultrasound assessment of normal renal dimension. J Ultrasound Med 1:49–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Emamian SA, Nielsen MB, Pedersen JF (1995) Intraobserver and interobserver variations in sonographic measurements of kidney size in adult volunteers. A comparison of linear measurements and volumetric estimates. Acta Radiol 36:399–401

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fiorini F, Barozzi L (2007) The role of ultrasound in the study of medical nephropathy. J Ultrasound 10(4):161–167

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Granata A, Bigi MC, Andrulli S, Logias F, Scuderi R, Fiorini F (2010) L’analisi del segnale Doppler. In: Granata A, Fiorini F, D’Amelio A, Logias F, Andrulli S. L’ecocolorDoppler nella pratica nefrologica. Forum Service, Italy, 1:49–61

    Google Scholar 

  11. Piscaglia F et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 33(1):5–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Ultrasound of the Bladder

  1. Athanasiou S et al (1999) Imaging the urethral sphincter with three-dimensional ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol 94(2):295–301

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Blatt A et al (2009) The importance of bladder wall thickness in the assessment of overactive bladder. Curr Bladder Dysfunction Rep 4:220–224

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bright E, Oelke M, Tubaro A, Abrams P (2010) Ultrasound estimated bladder weight and measurement of bladder wall thickness—Useful noninvasive methods for assessing the lower urinary tract? J Urol 184:1847–1854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Costantini S et al (2006) Ultrasound imaging of the female perineum: the effect of vaginal delivery on pelvic floor dynamics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 27(2):183–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Costantini S et al (2005) Perineal ultrasound evaluation of the urethrovesical junction angle and urethral mobility in nulliparous women and women following vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16(6):455–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Granados Loarca EA et al (1999) The usefulness of perineal ultrasound in urinary incontinence in women. Arch Esp Urol 52(7):778–782

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kanu GB (2010) Ultrasonography of the urinary bladder. J Med Ultrasound 18(3):105–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Masata J et al (2000) Ultrasonography of the funneling of the urethra. Ceska Gynekol 65(2):87–90

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Martan A et al (2000) The effect of bladder filling on changes in ultrasonography parameters of the lower urinary tract in women with urinary stress incontinence. Ceska Gynekol 65(1):10–13

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Minardi D et al (2007) Correlation between urodynamics and perineal ultrasound in female patients with urinary incontinence. Neurol Urodyn 26:176–182

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Peschers UM et al (2001) Bladder neck mobility in continent nulliparous women. BJOG 108(3):320–324

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Reilly ETC et al (2002) Prevention of postpartum stress incontinence in primigravidae with increased bladder neck mobility: a randomised controlled trial of antenatal pelvic floor exercises. Br J Obstet Gynecol 109:68–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Robinson D (2002) Cardozo L Can ultrasound replace ambulatory urodynamics when investigating women with irritative urinary symptoms? BJOG 109(2):145–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schaer GN et al (1996) Perineal ultrasound: determination of reliable examination procedures. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 7(5):347–352

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Seung HK (2007) Ultrasound of the urinary bladder. Revisited J Med Ultrasound 15(2):77–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Siracusano S et al (2001) Colour Doppler ultrasonography of female urethral vascularization in normal young volunteers: a preliminary report. BJU Int 88(4):378–381

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Strasser H et al (2000) Anatomic and functional studies of the male and female urethral sphincter. World J Urol 18(5):324–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tunn R et al (2005) Update recommendations on ultrasonography in urogynecology. Int Urogynecol J 16:236–241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Umek WH et al (2001) Three-dimensional ultrasound of the female urethra: comparing transvaginal and transrectal scanning. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17(5):425–430

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Piscaglia F et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 33(1):5–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Prostate and Seminal Vesicles:Prostatic Ultrasound Scanning with the Suprapubic Technique

  1. Tokgöz Ö, Tokgöz H, Ünal I, Delibaş U, Yıldız S, Voyvoda N, Erdem Z (2012) Diagnostic values of detrusor wall thickness, postvoid residual urine, and prostate volume to evaluate lower urinary tract symptoms in men. Diagn Interv Radiol 18(3):277–281

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica –Linee guida della diagnostica per immagini 2009. http://www.sirm.org/it/documenti/cat_view/66-linee-guida.html

  3. American College of Radiology –Ultrasound Guidelines. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Standards-Guidelines/Practice-Guidelines-byModality/Ultrasound

  4. European Association of Urology – 2012 Guidelines. http://www.uroweb.org/guidelines/online-guidelines

  5. American Association of Urology Guidelines. http://www.auanet.org/content/clinical-practice-guidelines/clinical-guidelines.cfm

  6. Stravodimos KG, Petrolekas A, Kapetanakis T, Vourekas S, Koritsiadis G, Adamakis I, Mitropoulos D, Constantinides C (2009) TRUS versus transabdominal ultrasound as a predictor of enucleated adenoma weight in patients with BPH: a tool for standard preoperative work-up? Int Urol Nephrol 41(4):767–771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Strasser H, Janetschek G, Reissigl A, Bartsch G (1996) Prostate zones in three dimensional transrectal ultrasound. Urology 47:485–490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Aarnick RG, Huynen AL, Giesen RJ, De la Rosette JJ, Debruyne FM, Wijkstra H (1995) Automated prostate Volume determination with double ultrasonographic imaging. J Urol 153:1549–1554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Tong S, Downey DB, Cardinal HN, Fenster A (1996) A three dimensional ultrasound prostate imaging system. Ultrasound Med Biol 22(6):735–746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Prostate and Seminal Vesicles: Transrectal Prostatic Ultrasound

  1. Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica –Linee guida della diagnostica per immagini 2009. http://www.sirm.org/it/documenti/cat_view/66-linee-guida.html

  2. American College of Radiology –Ultrasound Guidelines. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Standards-Guidelines/Practice-Guidelines-byModality/Ultrasound

  3. European Association of Urology – 2012 Guidelines. http://www.uroweb.org/guidelines/online-guidelines

  4. American Association of Urology Guidelines. http://www.auanet.org/content/clinical-practice-guidelines/clinical-guidelines.cfm

  5. Stravodimos KG, Petrolekas A, Kapetanakis T, Vourekas S, Koritsiadis G, Adamakis I, Mitropoulos D, Constantinides C (2009) TRUS versus transabdominal ultrasound as a predictor of enucleated adenoma weight in patients with BPH: a tool for standard preoperative work-up? Int Urol Nephrol 41(4):767–771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Giubilei G, Ponchietti R, Biscioni S, Fanfani A, Ciatto S, DI Loro F, Gavazzi A, Mondaini N (2005) Accuracy of prostate volume measurements using transrectal multiplanar three dimensional sonography. Int J Urol 12(10):936–938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pierangeli T, Muraro GB (2002) Role of 3D-ultrasonography in the assessment of transitional zone PSA. Arch Ital Urol Androl 74:282–284

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Strasser H, Janetschek G, Reissigl A, Bartsch G (1996) Prostrate zones in three dimensional transrectal ultrasound. Urology 47:485–490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aarnick RG, Huynen AL, Giesen RJ, De la Rosette JJ, Debruyne FM, Wijkstra H (1995) Automated prostate Volume determination with double ultrasonographic imaging. J Urol 153:1549–1554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tong S, Downey DB, Cardinal HN, Fenster A (1996) A three-dimensional ultrasound prostate imaging system. Ultrasound Med Biol 22(6):735–746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Watanabe H, Igari D, Tanahashi Y, Harada K, Saitoh M (1974) Measurement of size and weight of the prostate by means of transrectal ultrasonotomography. Tohoku J Exp Med 114:277–285

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aarnink RG, De La Rosette JMCH, Debruyne FMJ, Wijkstra H (1996) Reproducibility of prostate volume measurements from transrectal ultrasonography by an automated and a manual technique. Br J Urol 78:219–223

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Purohit RS, Shinohara K, Meng MV, Carroll PR (2003) Imaging clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 30:279–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kijvikai K (2009) Digital rectal examination, serum prostatic specific antigen or transrectal ultrasonography: the best tool to guide the treatment of men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Opin Urol 19(1):44–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shinbo H, Kurita Y (2011) Application of ultrasonography and the resistive index for evaluating bladder outlet obstruction in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Urol Rep 12(4):255–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. de la Rosette J, Alivizatos G, Madersbacher S, Rioja Sanz C, Nordling J, Emberton M, Gravas S, Michel MC, Oelke M (2007) EAU2007 guidelines on benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Assoc Urol 5–59

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grayhack JT, McVary KT, Kozlowski JM (2002) Benign prostatic hyperplasia. In: Gillenwater JY, Grayhack JT, Howards SS, Mitchell ME (eds) Adult and pediatric urology, 4th edn. LWW, Philadelphia, pp 1401–1470

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kaplan SA, McConnell JD, Roehrborn CG, Meehan AG, Lee MW, Noble WR, Kusek JW, Nyberg LM Jr, Medical Therapy of Prostatic Symptoms (MTOPS) Research Group (2006) Combination therapy with doxazosin and finasteride for benign prostatic hyperplasia in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and a baseline total prostate volume of 25 ml or greater. J Urol 175:217–220. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00041-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Uchida T, Ohori M, Soh S, Sato T, Iwamura M, Ao T, Koshiba K (1999) Factors influencing morbidity in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate. Urology 53:98–105. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00524-X

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ash D, Flynn A, Battermann J, de Reijke T, Lavagnini P, Blank L, ESTRA/EAU Urological Brachytherapy Group, EORTC Radiotherapy Group (2000) ESTRO/EAU/EORTC recommendations on permanent seed implantation for localized prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 57:315–321. doi:10.1016/S0167-8140(00)00306-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Meraj S, Nagler HM, Homel P, Shasha D, Wagner JR (2003) Radical prostatectomy: size of the prostate gland and its relationship with acute perioperative complications. Can J Urol 10:1743–1748

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kalish J, Cooner WH, Graham SD Jr (1994) Serum PSA adjusted for volume of transition zone (PSAT) is more accurate than PSA adjusted for total gland volume (PSAD) in detecting adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Urology 43:601–606. doi:10.1016/0090-4295(94)90170-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zlotta AR, Djavan B, Marberger M, Schulman CC (1997) Prostate specific antigen density of the transition zone: a new effective parameter for prostate cancer prediction. J Urol 157:1315–1321. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64961-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zlotta AR, Djavan B, Damoun M, Roumeguere T, Petein M, Entezari K, Marberger M, Schulman CC (1999) The importance of measuring the prostatic transition zone: an anatomical and radiological study. BJU Int 84:661–666. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00214.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Aus G, Bergdahl S, Hugosson J, Norle’n L (1994) Volume determinations of the whole prostate and of adenomas by transrectal ultrasound in patients with clinically benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation of resected weight, blood loss and duration of operation. Br J Urol 73:659–663. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.1994.tb07552.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Baltaci S, Yagci C, Aksoy H, Elan AH, Go¨gu¨s O (2000) Determination of transition zone volume by transrectal ultrasound in patients with clinically benign prostatic hyperplasia: agreement with enucleated prostate adenoma weight. J Urol 164:72–75. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67452–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Aarnink RG, Beerlage HP, De La Rosette JJ, Debruyne FM, Wijkstra H (1998) Transrectal ultrasound of the prostate: innovations and future applications. J Urol 159:1568–1579. doi:10.1097/00005392-199805000-00045

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sajadi KP, Terris MK, Hamilton RJ, Cullen J, Amling CL, Kane CJ, Presti JC Jr, Aronson WJ, Freedland SJ (2007) Body mass index, prostate weight and transrectal ultrasound prostate volume accuracy. J Urol 178:990–995. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.049

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Matthews GJ, Motta J, Fracehia JA (1996) The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound prostate volume estimation: clinical correlations. J Clin Ultrasound 24:501–505. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199611/12)24:9\501::AID-JCU2[3.0.CO;2-R

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tewari A, Indudhara R, Shinohara K, Schalow E, Woods M, Lee R, Anderson C, Narayan P (1996) Comparison of transrectal ultrasound prostatic volume estimation with magnetic resonance imaging volume estimation and surgical specimen weight in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Clin Ultrasound 24:169–174. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199605)24:4\169::AID-JCU2[3.0.CO;2-D

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alkan I, Turkeri L, Biren T, Cevik I, Akdas A (1996) Volume determinations by transrectal ultrasonography in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with removed prostate weight. Int Urol Nephrol 28:517–523. doi:10.1007/BF02550959

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Loeb S, Han M, Roehl KA, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ, Loeb S, Han M, Roehl KA, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ (2005) Accuracy of prostate weight estimation by digital rectal examination versus transrectal ultrasonography. J Urol 173:63–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee JS, Chung BH (2007) Transrectal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging in the estimation of prostate volume as compared with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Int 78:323–327. doi:10.1159/000100836

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rahmouni A, Yang A, Tempany CM, Frenkel T, Epstein J, Walsh P, Leichner PK, Ricci C, Zerhouni E (1992) Accuracy of in vivo assessment of prostatic volume by MRI and transrectal ultrasonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 16:935–940

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cabello Benavente R, Jara Rascon J, Monzo JI, Lopez Diez I, Subira Rios D, Lledo Garcia E, Herranz Amo F, Hernandez Fernandez C (2006) Volume determinations of the whole prostate and of the adenoma by transrectal ultrasound: correlation with surgical specimen. Actas Urol Esp 30:175–180

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Nathan MS, Seenivasagam K, Mei Q, Wickham JE, Miller RA (1996) Transrectal ultrasonography: why are estimates of prostate volume and dimension so inaccurate? Br J Urol 77:401–407

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Galosi AB, Montironi R, Fabiani A, Lacetera V, Gallé G, Muzzonigro G (2009) Cystic lesions of the prostate gland: an ultrasound classification with pathological correlation. J Urol 181:647–657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Piscaglia F et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 33(1):5–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Martino P, Palazzo S, Bufo P, Garofano L, Selvaggi FP (2000) Three-dimensional digital ultrasound for early staging of prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol 164:456

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Martino P, Scattoni V, Galosi AB, Consonni P, Trombetta C, Palazzo S, Maccagnano C, Liguori G, Valentino M, Battaglia M, Barozzi L (2011) Role of imaging and biopsy to assess local recurrence after definitive treatment for prostate carcinoma (surgery, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, HIFU). World J Urol 29(5):595–605

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ultrasound of the Scrotum

  1. Akin EA, Khati NJ, Hill MC (2004) Ultrasound of the scrotum. Ultrasound Q 20:181–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Baldisserotto M, de Souza JC, Pertence AP, Dora MD (2005) Color Doppler sonography of normal and torsed testicular appendages in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1287–1292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Basu S, Howlett DC (2001) High-resolution ultrasound in the evaluation of the nonacute testis. Abdom Imaging 26:425–432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhatt S, Dogra VS (2008) Role of US in testicular and scrotal trauma. Radiographics 28(6):1617–1629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bertolotto M, Trombetta C (eds) (2012) Scrotal pathology, 1st edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  6. Casalino DD, Kim R (2002) Clinical importance of a unilateral striated pattern seen on sonography of the testicle. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:927–930

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dogra VS, Bhatt S (2004) Acute painful scrotum. Radiol Clin North Am 42:349–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dogra VS, Gottlieb RH, Oka M, Rubens DJ (2003) Sonography of the scrotum. Radiology 227:18–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dogra VS, Rubens DJ, Gottlieb RH, Bhatt S (2004) Torsion and beyond: new twists in spectral Doppler evaluation of the scrotum. J Ultrasound Med 23:1077–1085

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dogra VS, Gottlieb RH, Rubens DJ, Liao L (2001) Benign intratesticular cystic lesions: US features. Radiographics 21(1)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gorman B, Carroll BA (2005) Scrotal sonography. In: Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW (eds) Diagnostic ultrasound, 3rd edn. CV Mosby Co, Chicago, pp 849–888

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hörmann M, Balassy C, Philipp MO, Pumberger W (2004) Imaging of the scrotum in children. Eur Radiol 14:974–983

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Karmazyn B, Steinberg R, Kornreich L et al (2005) Clinical and sonographic criteria of acute scrotum in children: a retrospective study of 172 boys. Pediatr Radiol 35:302–310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim W, Rosen MA, Langer JE, Banner MP, Siegelman ES, Ramchandani P (2007) US MR imaging correlation in pathologic conditions of the scrotum. Radiographics 27(5):1239–1253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mirochnik B, Bhargava P, Dighe MK, Kanth N (2012) Ultrasound evaluation of scrotal pathology. Radiol Clin North Am 50(2):317–332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pavlica P, Barozzi L (2001) Imaging of the acute scrotum. Eur Radiol 11(2):220–228

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pearl MS, Hill MC (2007) Ultrasound of the scrotum. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 28(4):225–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Philips S, Nagar A, Dighe M, Vikram R, Sunnapwar A, Prasad S (2012) Benign non-cystic scrotal tumors and pseudotumors. Acta Radiol 53(1):102–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ragheb D, Higgins JL Jr (2002) Ultrasonography of the scrotum: technique, anatomy, and pathologic entities. J Ultrasound Med 21(2):171–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sudakoff GS, Quiroz F, Karcaaltincaba M, Foley WD (2002) Scrotal ultrasonography with emphasis on the extratesticular space: anatomy, embryology, and pathology. Ultrasound Q 18:255–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Woodward PJ, Sohaey R, O’Donoghue MJ, Green DE (2002) From the archives of the AFIP: tumors and tumorlike lesions of the testis—radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 22:189–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yang DM, Kim SH, Kim HN, et al (2003) Differential diagnosis of focal epididymal lesions with gray scale sonographic, color Doppler sonography, and clinical features. J Ultrasound Med 22(2):135–42

    Google Scholar 

  23. Galosi AB, Lacetera V, Muzzonigro G (2008) Clinica delle malattie testicolari di interesse ecografico. Urologia 75(4):S12, s59–66

    Google Scholar 

Ultrasound of the Penis

  1. Bassiouny HS, Levine LA (1991) Penile duplex sonography in the diagnosis of venogenic impotence. J Vasc Surg 13:75–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bearcroft PW, Berman LH (1994) Sonography in the evaluation of the male anterior urethra. Clin Radiol 49:621–626

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Broderick GA, Lue TF (1991) The penile blood flow study: evaluation of vasculogenic impotence. In: Jonas U, Thon W, Stief CG F (eds) Erectile dysfunction. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chou YH, Tiu CM, Pan HB et al (1987) High-resolution real-time ultrasound in Peyronie’s disease. J Ultrasound Med 6:67–70

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Choudhary S, Singh P, Sundar E, Kumar S, Sahai A (2004) A comparison of sonourethrography and retrograde urethrography in evaluation of anterior urethral strictures. Clin Radiol 59:736–742

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kadioğlu A, Tefekli A, Erol H, Cayan S, Kandirali E (2000) Color Doppler ultrasound assessment of penile vascular system in men with Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res 12:263–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim B, Kawashima A, LeRoy AJ (2007) Imaging of the male urethra. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 28:258–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. King BF, Lewis RW, McKusick MA (1994) Evaluation of impotence. In: Bennett AH (ed) Impotence: diagnosis and management of erectile dysfunction. WB Saunders Co, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  9. Morey AF, McAninch JW (2000) Sonographic staging of anterior urethral strictures. J Urol 163:1070–1075

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Patel U, Lees WR (1995) Penile sonography. In: Solbiati L, Rizzatto G (eds) Ultrasound of superficial structures. Churchill Livingstone, London, pp 229–242

    Google Scholar 

Ultrasound of the Penis: Penile Echo Color Doppler

  1. Halls J, Bydawell G, Patel U (2009) Erectile dysfunction: the role of penile Doppler ultrasound in diagnosis. Abdom Imaging 34(6):712–725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Broderick GA (1998) Evidence based assessment of erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 10 Suppl 2:S64–73; discussion S7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Benson CB, Aruny JE, Vickers MA Jr (1993) Correlation of duplex sonography with arteriography in patients with erectile dysfunction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 160(1):71–73

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Quam JP, King BF, James EM, Lewis RW, Brakke DM, Ilstrup DM et al (1989) Duplex and color Doppler sonographic evaluation of vasculogenic impotence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 153(6):1141–1147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Patel U, Amin Z, Friedman E, Vale J, Kirby RW, Lees WR (1993) Colour flow and spectral Doppler imaging after papaverine-induced penile erection in 220 impotent men: study of temporal patterns and the importance of repeated sampling, velocity asymmetry and vascular anomalies. Clin Radiol 48(1):18–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fitzgerald SW, Erickson SJ, Foley WD, Lipchik EO, Lawson TL (1991) Color Doppler sonography in the evaluation of erectile dysfunction: patterns of temporal response to papaverine. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157(2):331–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bertolotto M (ed) (2008) Color Doppler US of the penis. Berlin: Springer; 2008, ISBN:978-3-540-36676-8

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Emergency and Organ, Transplantation – Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, Bari, Italy

    Pasquale Martino

  2. University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Pasquale Martino

  3. Institute of Urology - Polytechnic, University of Marche, Ancona, Italy

    Andrea Benedetto Galosi

Authors
  1. Pasquale Martino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Benedetto Galosi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pasquale Martino .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation Urology Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Pasquale Martino

  2. Division of Urology, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy

    Andrea B. Galosi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Martino, P., Galosi, A.B. (2017). Practical Recommendations for Performing Ultrasound Scanning in the Urological and Andrological Fields. In: Martino, P., Galosi, A. (eds) Atlas of Ultrasonography in Urology, Andrology, and Nephrology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40782-1_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40782-1_59

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-40780-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-40782-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation