To define a new coefficient to be used in the formula (Volume = L x H x W x Coefficient) that better estimates prostate volume using dimensions of fresh prostates from patients who had transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) imaging prior to prostatectomy. The prostate was obtained from 153 patients, weighed and measured to obtain length (L), height (H), and width (W). The density was determined by water displacement to calculate volume. TRUS data were retrieved from patient charts. Linear regression analyses were performed to compare various prostate volume formulas, including the commonly used ellipsoid formula and newly introduced bullet-shaped formula. By relating measured prostate volumes from fresh prostates to TRUS-estimated prostate volumes, 0.66 was the best fitting coefficient in the (L x H x W x Coefficient) equation. This newfound coefficient combined with outlier removal yielded a linear equation with an R2 of 0.64, compared to 0.55 and 0.60, for the ellipsoid and bullet, respectively. By comparing each of the measured vs. estimated dimensions, we observed that the mean prostate height and length were overestimated by 11.1 and 10.8% using ultrasound (p < 0.05), respectively, while the mean width was similar (p > 0.05). Overall, the ellipsoid formula underestimates prostate volumes by 18%, compared to an overestimation of 4.6 and 5.7% for the bullet formula and the formula using our coefficient, respectively. This study defines, for the first time, a coefficient based on freshly resected prostates as a reference to estimate volumes by imaging. Our findings support a bullet rather than an ellipsoid prostate shape. Moreover, substituting the coefficient commonly used in the ellipsoid formula by our calculated coefficient in the equation estimating prostate volume by TRUS, provides a more accurate value of the true prostate volume.

(1) Background: Patients and survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC) are at a high risk of developing body image concerns. Despite the prevalence of body image concerns in patients with HNC, there is a lack of longitudinal research exploring the wide array of its associated determinants. The current longitudinal study examined the determinants and longitudinal course of body image dissatisfaction in patients with HNC. (2) Methods: Patients participated in Structured Clinical Interviews and self-administered questionnaires at four time-points: (T1) upon cancer diagnosis, (T2) at 3 months post-diagnosis, (T3) at 6 months post-diagnosis, and (T4) at 12 months post-diagnosis. They also underwent a disfigurement rating on an objective scale. (3) Results: Two hundred and twenty-four patients participated in our study. Fourteen percent to twenty-eight percent of patients reported at least moderate body image concerns across time points, with the lowest rates at baseline and the highest at 3 months (T1). It was found that patients more predisposed to developing higher levels of body image concerns presented physical markers (i.e., advanced cancer stage, lower physical functioning, higher disfigurement), psychosocial markers (i.e., higher depression, higher anxiety, and higher levels of coping with denial), and health disparities (i.e., younger age, female sex, French language, and marital status, with divorced and widowers most affected). (4) Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight the multifaceted nature of body image concerns in patients with HNC and its biopsychosocial determinants. Clinicians should pay specific attention to these biopsychosocial markers in their clinics to predict high levels of body image concerns and tailor communication/refer for support accordingly.