Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Suspicion of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Variant: 1 Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.

Procedure	Appropriateness Category	Relative Radiation Level
US kidneys retroperitoneal	May Be Appropriate	O
US pelvis (bladder and prostate) transabdominal	May Be Appropriate	O
TRUS prostate	Usually Not Appropriate	O
Fluoroscopy voiding cystourethrography	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢
Radiography abdomen	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢
Fluoroscopy retrograde urethrography	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
Radiography intravenous urography	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
MRI pelvis without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	O
CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢
CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast	Usually Not Appropriate	☢☢☢☢

Panel Members

Summary of Literature Review

Introduction/Background

Discussion of Procedures by Variant

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
A. Radiography Abdomen

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
B. Radiography Intravenous Urography

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
C. Fluoroscopy Retrograde Urethrography

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
D. Fluoroscopy Voiding Cystourethrography

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
E. TRUS Prostate

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
F. US Pelvis

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
G. US Kidneys Retroperitoneal

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
H. CT Abdomen and Pelvis

Variant 1: Lower urinary tract symptoms. Suspicion of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial imaging.
I. MRI Pelvis

Summary of Recommendations

Supporting Documents

The evidence table, literature search, and appendix for this topic are available at https://acsearch.acr.org/list. The appendix includes the strength of evidence assessment and the final rating round tabulations for each recommendation.

For additional information on the Appropriateness Criteria methodology and other supporting documents, please go to the ACR website at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Appropriateness-Criteria.

Appropriateness Category Names and Definitions

Appropriateness Category Name	Appropriateness Rating	Appropriateness Category Definition
Usually Appropriate	7, 8, or 9	The imaging procedure or treatment is indicated in the specified clinical scenarios at a favorable risk-benefit ratio for patients.
May Be Appropriate	4, 5, or 6	The imaging procedure or treatment may be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios as an alternative to imaging procedures or treatments with a more favorable risk-benefit ratio, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is equivocal.
May Be Appropriate (Disagreement)	5	The individual ratings are too dispersed from the panel median. The different label provides transparency regarding the panel’s recommendation. “May be appropriate” is the rating category and a rating of 5 is assigned.
Usually Not Appropriate	1, 2, or 3	The imaging procedure or treatment is unlikely to be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is likely to be unfavorable.

Relative Radiation Level Information

Potential adverse health effects associated with radiation exposure are an important factor to consider when selecting the appropriate imaging procedure. Because there is a wide range of radiation exposures associated with different diagnostic procedures, a relative radiation level (RRL) indication has been included for each imaging examination. The RRLs are based on effective dose, which is a radiation dose quantity that is used to estimate population total radiation risk associated with an imaging procedure. Patients in the pediatric age group are at inherently higher risk from exposure, because of both organ sensitivity and longer life expectancy (relevant to the long latency that appears to accompany radiation exposure). For these reasons, the RRL dose estimate ranges for pediatric examinations are lower as compared with those specified for adults (see Table below). Additional information regarding radiation dose assessment for imaging examinations can be found in the ACR Appropriateness Criteria^® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction document.

Relative Radiation Level Designations
Relative Radiation Level*	Adult Effective Dose Estimate Range	Pediatric Effective Dose Estimate Range
O	0 mSv	0 mSv
☢	<0.1 mSv	<0.03 mSv
☢☢	0.1-1 mSv	0.03-0.3 mSv
☢☢☢	1-10 mSv	0.3-3 mSv
☢☢☢☢	10-30 mSv	3-10 mSv
☢☢☢☢☢	30-100 mSv	10-30 mSv
*RRL assignments for some of the examinations cannot be made, because the actual patient doses in these procedures vary as a function of a number of factors (e.g., region of the body exposed to ionizing radiation, the imaging guidance that is used). The RRLs for these examinations are designated as “Varies.”

References

1.	Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, et al. EAU Guidelines on the Assessment of Non-neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms including Benign Prostatic Obstruction. [Review]. Eur Urol. 67(6):1099-109, 2015 Jun.
2.	Hecht SL, Hedges JC. Diagnostic Work-Up of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. [Review]. Urol Clin North Am. 43(3):299-309, 2016 Aug.
3.	Egan KB.. The Epidemiology of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Associated with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Prevalence and Incident Rates. [Review]. Urol Clin North Am. 43(3):289-97, 2016 Aug.
4.	Bosch JL, Bohnen AM, Groeneveld FP. Validity of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the estimation of prostate volume in community-based men aged 50 to 78 years: the Krimpen Study. European Urology. 46(6):753-9, 2004 Dec.Eur Urol. 46(6):753-9, 2004 Dec.
5.	El-Zawahry A, Alanee S, Malan-Elzawahry A. The Use of Urodynamics Assessment Before the Surgical Treatment of BPH. [Review]. Curr Urol Rep. 17(10):73, 2016 Oct.
6.	Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, et al. EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. [Review]. Eur Urol. 64(1):118-40, 2013 Jul.
7.	Kuang M, Vu A, Athreya S. A Systematic Review of Prostatic Artery Embolization in the Treatment of Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. [Review]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 40(5):655-663, 2017 May.
8.	Porter T, Stoddart G, Hinchliffe A. The role of the plain X-ray in the assessment of prostatic symptoms. Br J Urol. 81(2):257-8, 1998 Feb.
9.	Stacul F, Rossi A, Cova MA. CT urography: the end of IVU? Radiol Med. 2008;113(5):658-669.
10.	Little MA, Stafford Johnson DB, O'Callaghan JP, Walshe JJ. The diagnostic yield of intravenous urography. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 15(2):200-4, 2000 Feb.
11.	Wasserman NF, Lapointe S, Eckmann DR, Rosel PR. Assessment of prostatism: role of intravenous urography. Radiology. 1987;165(3):831-835.
12.	O'Connor OJ, Fitzgerald E, Maher MM. Imaging of hematuria. [Review]. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 195(4):W263-7, 2010 Oct.
13.	Ahmad S, Manecksha RP, Cullen IM, et al. Estimation of clinically significant prostate volumes by digital rectal examination: a comparative prospective study. Can J Urol. 18(6):6025-30, 2011 Dec.
14.	Stravodimos KG, Petrolekas A, Kapetanakis T, 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. 41(4):767-71, 2009 Dec.
15.	Yuen JS, Ngiap JT, Cheng CW, Foo KT. Effects of bladder volume on transabdominal ultrasound measurements of intravesical prostatic protrusion and volume. Int J Urol. 9(4):225-9, 2002 Apr.
16.	Tatar IG, Ergun O, Celtikci P, Birgi E, Hekimoglu B. Value of prostate gland volume measurement by transrectal US in prediction of the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms. Med. ultrasonography. 16(4):315-8, 2014 Dec.
17.	Danish Qaseem SM, Ghonge NP, Aggarwal B, Singhal S. Prospective evaluation of prostate with transrectal spectral Doppler with biopsy correlation: a clinicopathologic study. Br J Radiol. 89(1060):20150830, 2016.
18.	Shinbo H, Kurita Y. Application of ultrasonography and the resistive index for evaluating bladder outlet obstruction in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. [Review]. Curr Urol Rep. 12(4):255-60, 2011 Aug.
19.	Foo KT.. Decision making in the management of benign prostatic enlargement and the role of transabdominal ultrasound. [Review]. Int J Urol. 17(12):974-9, 2010 Dec.
20.	Kuo TL, Teo JS, Foo KT. The role of intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) in the evaluation and treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). Neurourol Urodyn. 35(4):535-7, 2016 Apr.
21.	Nose H, Foo KT, Lim KB, Yokoyama T, Ozawa H, Kumon H. Accuracy of two noninvasive methods of diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction using ultrasonography: intravesical prostatic protrusion and velocity-flow video urodynamics. Urology. 65(3):493-7, 2005 Mar.
22.	Chiang Po, Chuang YC, Huang CC, Chiang CP. Pilot study of transperineal injection of dehydrated ethanol in the treatment of prostatic obstruction. Urology. 61(4):797-801, 2003 Apr.
23.	Tan YH, Foo KT. Intravesical prostatic protrusion predicts the outcome of a trial without catheter following acute urine retention. J Urol. 170(6 Pt 1):2339-41, 2003 Dec.
24.	Wang D, Huang H, Law YM, Foo KT. Relationships between Prostatic Volume and Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion on Transabdominal Ultrasound and Benign Prostatic Obstruction in Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 44(2):60-5, 2015 Feb.
25.	Ahmed AF.. Sonographic Parameters Predicting the Outcome of Patients With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treated With Alpha1-Adrenoreceptor Antagonist. Urology. 88:143-8, 2016 Feb.
26.	Shin SH, Kim JW, Kim JW, Oh MM, Moon du G. Defining the degree of intravesical prostatic protrusion in association with bladder outlet obstruction. Korean J Urol. 54(6):369-72, 2013 Jun.
27.	Suzuki T, Otsuka A, Ozono S. Combination of intravesical prostatic protrusion and resistive index is useful to predict bladder outlet obstruction in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int J Urol. 23(11):929-933, 2016 Nov.
28.	Arnolds M, Oelke M. Positioning invasive versus noninvasive urodynamics in the assessment of bladder outlet obstruction. [Review] [57 refs]. Curr Opin Urol. 19(1):55-62, 2009 Jan.
29.	Ho CC, Ngoo KS, Hamzaini AH, Rizal AM, Zulkifli MZ. Urinary bladder characteristics via ultrasound as predictors of acute urinary retention in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clin Ter. 165(2):75-81, 2014.
30.	Miyashita H, Kojima M, Miki T. Ultrasonic measurement of bladder weight as a possible predictor of acute urinary retention in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ultrasound Med Biol. 28(8):985-90, 2002 Aug.
31.	Grossfeld GD, Coakley FV. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: clinical overview and value of diagnostic imaging. [Review] [70 refs]. Radiol Clin North Am. 38(1):31-47, 2000 Jan.
32.	Kang TW, Song JM, Kim KJ, et al. Clinical application of computed tomography on prostate volume estimation in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urol. j.. 11(6):1980-3, 2014 Nov 30.
33.	Expert Panel on Urologic Imaging:, Coakley FV, Oto A, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria R Prostate Cancer-Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging. [Review]. J. Am. Coll. Radiol.. 14(5S):S245-S257, 2017 May.
34.	Guneyli S, Ward E, Thomas S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Diagn Interv Radiol. 22(3):215-9, 2016 May-Jun.
35.	Turkbey B, Huang R, Vourganti S, et al. Age-related changes in prostate zonal volumes as measured by high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): a cross-sectional study in over 500 patients. BJU Int. 110(11):1642-7, 2012 Dec.
36.	Guneyli S, Ward E, Peng Y, et al. MRI evaluation of benign prostatic hyperplasia: Correlation with international prostate symptom score. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 45(3):917-925, 2017 Mar.J Magn Reson Imaging. 45(3):917-925, 2017 Mar.
37.	Wasserman NF, Spilseth B, Golzarian J, Metzger GJ. Use of MRI for Lobar Classification of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Potential Phenotypic Biomarkers for Research on Treatment Strategies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 205(3):564-71, 2015 Sep.
38.	Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 378(19):1767-1777, 2018 May 10.
39.	American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction. Available at: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/americancoldf5f-acrorgf92a-productioncb02-3650/media/ACR/Files/Clinical/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria-Radiation-Dose-Assessment-Introduction.pdf.

Disclaimer

The ACR Committee on Appropriateness Criteria and its expert panels have developed criteria for determining appropriate imaging examinations for diagnosis and treatment of specified medical condition(s). These criteria are intended to guide radiologists, radiation oncologists and referring physicians in making decisions regarding radiologic imaging and treatment. Generally, the complexity and severity of a patient’s clinical condition should dictate the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Only those examinations generally used for evaluation of the patient’s condition are ranked. Other imaging studies necessary to evaluate other co-existent diseases or other medical consequences of this condition are not considered in this document. The availability of equipment or personnel may influence the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Imaging techniques classified as investigational by the FDA have not been considered in developing these criteria; however, study of new equipment and applications should be encouraged. The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any specific radiologic examination or treatment must be made by the referring physician and radiologist in light of all the circumstances presented in an individual examination.