Transrectal Ultrasound of the Prostate

  • Edouard J. TrabulsiEmail author
  • Xiaolong S. Liu
  • Akhil K. Das
Part of the Current Clinical Urology book series (CCU)


Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), first described by Watanabe and colleagues in the 1960s, is an essential tool for the diagnosis of prostate cancer as well as for image-guided prostate interventions [1]. By the 1970s TRUS imaging had achieved wide use in clinical practice. Most commonly, TRUS is used to guide core needle biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis. This was first described by Hodge in 1989 when he advocated the systematic biopsy of the prostate gland [2]. Treatment modalities including brachytherapy, cryotherapy, and high-intensity focus ultrasound (HIFU) also rely on TRUS to appropriately treat prostate cancer patients [3]. In addition, TRUS provides valuable information for follow-up and treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). TRUS may be helpful in the evaluation of patients with idiopathic infertility [4–8]. The indications and techniques for TRUS, proper documentation, anatomy of the prostate, and new ultrasonographic technologies will be discussed in this chapter. The topic of TRUS with prostate biopsy is covered in a separate chapter.


Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Seminal Vesicle Prostate Biopsy Prostate Volume Ejaculatory Duct 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Watanabe H, et al. [Diagnostic application of ultrasonotomography to the prostate]. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 1968;59(4):273–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hodge KK, et al. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol. 1989;142(1):71–4. discussion 74–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beerlage HP. Alternative therapies for localized prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2003;4(3):216–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wasserman NF. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review and ultrasound classification. Radiol Clin North Am. 2006;44(5):689–710. viii.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stravodimos KG, et al. 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. 2009;41(4): 767–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith JF, Walsh TJ, Turek PJ. Ejaculatory duct obstruction. Urol Clin North Am. 2008;35(2):221–7. viii.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raviv G, et al. Role of transrectal ultrasonography in the evaluation of azoospermic men with low-volume ejaculate. J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25(7):825–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zahalsky M, Nagler HM. Ultrasound and infertility: diagnostic and therapeutic uses. Curr Urol Rep. 2001; 2(6):437–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frauscher F, Klauser A, Halpern EJ. Advances in ultrasound for the detection of prostate cancer. Ultrasound Q. 2002;18(2):135–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Onur R, et al. Contemporary impact of transrectal ultrasound lesions for prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 2004;172(2):512–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Issa M, Oesterling J. Radiofrequency thermal therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia by transurethral needle ablation of the prostate. In: Narayan P, editor. Benign prostatic hyperplasia. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2000. p. 269–80.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wheelahan J, et al. Minimally invasive non-laser ­thermal techniques for prostatectomy: a systematic review. The ASERNIP-S review group. BJU Int. 2000;86(9):977–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eggener SE, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2260–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aus G. Current status of HIFU and cryotherapy in prostate cancer—a review. Eur Urol. 2006;50(5): 927–34. discussion 934.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marberger M, et al. New treatments for localized prostate cancer. Urology. 2008;72(6 Suppl):S36–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Polascik TJ, Mouraviev V. Focal therapy for prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2008;18(3):269–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dehnad H, et al. Clinical feasibility study for the use of implanted gold seeds in the prostate as reliable positioning markers during megavoltage irradiation. Radiother Oncol. 2003;67(3):295–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Linden RA, et al. Technique of outpatient placement of intraprostatic fiducial markers before external beam radiotherapy. Urology. 2009;73(4):881–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oliveira P, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of prostatic abscess. Int Braz J Urol. 2003;29(1):30–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lim JW, et al. Treatment of prostatic abscess: value of transrectal ultrasonographically guided needle aspiration. J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19(9):609–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kojima M, et al. Doppler resistive index in benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with ultrasonic appearance of the prostate and infravesical obstruction. Eur Urol. 2000;37(4):436–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Halpern EJ, et al. High-frequency Doppler US of the prostate: effect of patient position. Radiology. 2002;222(3):634–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kossoff G. Basic physics and imaging characteristics of ultrasound. World J Surg. 2000;24(2):134–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Terris MK, Stamey TA. Determination of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound. J Urol. 1991;145(5): 984–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Djavan B, et al. Optimal predictors of prostate cancer on repeat prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 1,051 men. J Urol. 2000;163(4):1144–8. discussion 1148–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rodriguez LV, Terris MK. Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2115–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Batura D, et al. Adding amikacin to fluoroquinolone-based antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces prostate biopsy infection rates. BJU Int. 2011;107(5):760–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McNeal JE. The zonal anatomy of the prostate. Prostate. 1981;2(1):35–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Christian JD, et al. Corpora amylacea in adenocarcinoma of the prostate: incidence and histology within needle core biopsies. Mod Pathol. 2005;18(1):36–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Halpern E. Anatomy of the prostate gland. In: Halpern E, Cochlin D, Goldberg B, editors. Imaging of the prostate. London: Martin Dunitz; 2002. p. 3–15.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Geramoutsos I, et al. Clinical correlation of prostatic lithiasis with chronic pelvic pain syndromes in young adults. Eur Urol. 2004;45(3):333–7. discussion 337–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sheih CP, et al. Seminal vesicle cyst associated with ipsilateral renal malformation and hemivertebra: report of 2 cases. J Urol. 1993;150(4):1214–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Narayana A. Tumors of the epididymis, seminal vesicles, and vas deferens (spermatic cord). In: Culp D, Loening S, editors. Genitourinary oncology. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger; 1985. p. 385–98.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Al-Saeed O, et al. Seminal vesicle masses detected incidentally during transrectal sonographic examination of the prostate. J Clin Ultrasound. 2003;31(4): 201–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cochlin DL. Cysts and congenital anomalies of the prostate and ejaculatory ducts. In: Halpern EJ, Cochlin DL, Golberg BB, editors. Imaging of the prostate. London: Martin Dunitz; 2002. p. 115–28.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    McDermott V, Orr JD, et al. Duplicated Mullerian duct remnants associated with unilateral renal agenesis. Abdom Imaging. 1993;18(2):193–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    King BF, Hattery RR, et al. Congenital cystic disease of the seminal vesicle. Radiology. 1991;178(1): 207–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Egawa S, Wheeler TM, et al. The sonographic appearance of irradiated prostate cancer. Br J Urol. 1991; 68(2):172–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stone NN, Stock RG. The effect of brachytherapy, external beam irradiation and hormonal therapy on prostate volume. J Urol. 2007;177(3):925–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Whittington R, Broderick GA, et al. The effect of androgen deprivation on the early changes in prostate volume following transperineal ultrasound guided interstitial therapy for localized carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999; 44(5):1107–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chen ME, et al. Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis. J Urol. 1997; 158(6):2168–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Daneshgari F, et al. Computer simulation of the probability of detecting low volume carcinoma of the prostate with six random systematic core biopsies. Urology. 1995;45(4):604–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bigler SA, Deering RE, Brawer MK. Comparison of microscopic vascularity in benign and malignant prostate tissue. Hum Pathol. 1993;24(2):220–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Taylor LS, et al. Three-dimensional sonoelastography: principles and practices. Phys Med Biol. 2000; 45(6):1477–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Newman JS, Bree RL, Rubin JM. Prostate cancer: diagnosis with color Doppler sonography with histologic correlation of each biopsy site. Radiology. 1995; 195(1):86–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Halpern EJ, Strup SE. Using gray-scale and color and power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(3):623–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cho JY, Kim SH, Lee SE. Diffuse prostatic lesions: role of color Doppler and power Doppler ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 1998;17(5):283–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Okihara K, et al. Ultrasonic power Doppler imaging for prostatic cancer: a preliminary report. Tohoku J Exp Med. 1997;182(4):277–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Nelson ED, et al. Targeted biopsy of the prostate: the impact of color Doppler imaging and elastography on prostate cancer detection and Gleason score. Urology. 2007;70(6):1136–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Furlow B. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Radiol Technol. 2009;80(6):547S–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Brawer MK, et al. Predictors of pathologic stage in prostatic carcinoma. The role of neovascularity. Cancer. 1994;73(3):678–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Frauscher F, et al. Detection of prostate cancer with a microbubble ultrasound contrast agent. Lancet. 2001;357(9271):1849–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Frauscher F, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy with conventional ­systematic biopsy: impact on prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 2002;167(4):1648–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Mitterberger M, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy to conventional systematic biopsy: impact on Gleason score. J Urol. 2007;178(2):464–8. discussion 468.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Linden RA, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound flash replenishment method for directed prostate biopsies. J Urol. 2007;178(6):2354–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hamper UM, et al. Three-dimensional US of the ­prostate: early experience. Radiology. 1999;212(3): 719–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Krouskop TA, et al. Elastic moduli of breast and prostate tissues under compression. Ultrason Imaging. 1998;20(4):260–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pallwein L, et al. Sonoelastography of the prostate: comparison with systematic biopsy findings in 492 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2008;65(2):304–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edouard J. Trabulsi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Xiaolong S. Liu
    • 1
  • Akhil K. Das
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyThomas Jefferson University, Kimmel Cancer CenterPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations