Quantitative mechanical assessment of the whole prostate gland ex vivo using dynamic instrumented palpation.

An instrumented palpation sensor, designed for measuring the dynamic modulus of tissue in vivo, has been developed and trialled on ex vivo whole prostate glands. The sensor consists of a flexible membrane sensor/actuator with an embedded strain gauge and is actuated using a dynamically varying airflow at frequencies of 1 and 5 Hz. The device was calibrated using an indentation stiffness measurement rig and gelatine samples with a range of static modulus similar to that reported in the literature for prostate tissue. The glands were removed from patients with diagnosed prostate cancer scheduled for radical prostatectomy, and the stiffness was measured within 30 min of surgical removal. Each prostate was later examined histologically in a column immediately below each indentation point and graded into one of the four groups; normal, benign prostatic hyperplasia, cancerous and mixed cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia. In total, 11 prostates were assessed using multiple point probing, and the complex modulus at 1 and 5 Hz was calculated on a point-by-point basis. The device yielded values of quasi-static modulus of 15 ± 0.5 kPa and dynamic modulus of 20 ± 0.5 kPa for whole prostates, and a sensitivity of up to 80% with slightly lower specificity was achieved on diagnosis of prostate cancer using a combination of mechanical measures. This assessment did not take into account some obvious factors such as edge effects, overlap and clinical significance of the cancer, all of which would improve performance. The device, as currently configured, is immediately deployable in vivo. A number of improvements are also identified which could improve the sensitivity and specificity in future embodiments of the probe.

Tissue quality assessment using a novel direct elasticity assessment device (the E-finger): a cadaveric study of prostatectomy dissection.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP) (robotic and laparoscopic), have brought improvements in the outcomes of RP due to improved views and increased degrees of freedom of surgical devices. Robotic and laparoscopic surgeries do not incorporate haptic feedback, which may result in complications secondary to inadequate tissue dissection (causing positive surgical margins, rhabdosphincter damage, etc). We developed a micro-engineered device (6 mm2 sized) [E-finger]) capable of quantitative elasticity assessment, with amplitude ratio, mean ratio and phase lag representing this. The aim was to assess the utility of the device in differentiating peri-prostatic tissue types in order to guide prostate dissection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two embalmed and 2 fresh frozen cadavers were used in the study. Baseline elasticity values were assessed in bladder, prostate and rhabdosphincter of pre-dissected embalmed cadavers using the micro-engineered device. A measurement grid was created to span from the bladder, across the prostate and onto the rhabdosphincter of fresh frozen cadavers to enable a systematic quantitative elasticity assessment of the entire area by 2 independent assessors. Tissue was sectioned along each row of elasticity measurement points, and stained with haematoxylin and eosin (H&E). Image analysis was performed with Image Pro Premier to determine the histology at each measurement point. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in elasticity were identified between bladder, prostate and sphincter in both embalmed and fresh frozen cadavers (p = < 0.001). Intra-class correlation (ICC) reliability tests showed good reliability (average ICC = 0.851). Sensitivity and specificity for tissue identification was 77% and 70% respectively to a resolution of 6 mm2. CONCLUSIONS: This cadaveric study has evaluated the ability of our elasticity assessment device to differentiate bladder, prostate and rhabdosphincter to a resolution of 6 mm2. The results provide useful data for which to continue to examine the use of elasticity assessment devices for tissue quality assessment with the aim of giving haptic feedback to surgeons performing complex surgery.

Elasticity as a biomarker for prostate cancer: a systematic review.

To systematically review the range of methods available for assessing elasticity in the prostate and to examine its use as a biomarker for prostate cancer. A systematic review of the electronic database PubMed was performed up to December 2012. All relevant studies assessing the use of elasticity as a biomarker for prostate cancer were included except those not studying human prostates or reporting a sensitivity, specificity or quantitative elasticity value. There has been much interest in the use of elasticity in the detection of prostate cancer and there have been many publications using various methods of detection. The most common method of assessment is an imaging method, called sonoelastography. Further imaging methods include ultrasound (US), three-dimensional US and magnetic resonance elastography. These methods are reviewed for sensitivity and specificity. The other method of assessment is the mechanical method. These use quantitative elasticity values to differentiate benign from malignant areas of the prostate. This method of assessment has shown that the elasticity changes for differing Gleason grades and T stages of disease within the prostate. Quantitative elasticity values offer the potential of using 'threshold' elasticity values under which the prostate is benign. Tissue elasticity has great potential as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for prostate cancer and can be assessed using various methods. Currently transrectal sonoelastography has the most evidence supporting its use in clinical practice.