StayCurrentMD · Study of Prostate Growth in Prune Belly Syndrome and Anencephalic Fetuses
Article1 min read·Published Nov 2019Older

Study of Prostate Growth in Prune Belly Syndrome and Anencephalic Fetuses

jpedsurg.org shows its articles on its own site.

Read the article on jpedsurg.org ↗

Article · Nov 2019 · 1 min read

In brief

In brief

Comparative morphometric study of prostate growth in 56 fetuses (normal, anencephalic, and prune belly syndrome) aged 11-31 weeks postconception. No significant differences in prostate volume were found between groups, though prostatic atresia was observed in two PBS cases.

Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.

Abstract

Background

To compare the growth of the prostate in anencephalic, prune belly syndrome (PBS) and control fetuses.

Methods

We studied 35 prostates from normal human fetuses aged 11–22 weeks postconception (WPC); 15 from anencephalic fetuses aged 13–19 WPC; and 6 from PBS fetuses aged 13–31WPC. After prostate dissection, we evaluated the prostate length, width and thickness with the aid of a computer program (Image Pro and Image J). The fetal prostate volume (PV) was calculated using the ellipsoid formula: PV = [length × thickness × width] × 0.523. The prostates were dissected and the PV was measured with the aid of the same computer program. Means were statistically compared using the unpaired t-test and linear regression was performed.

Results

In 2 PBS fetuses we observed prostatic atresia. We did not observe significant differences in PV when comparing the control group (PV: 6.1 to 313.81 mm, mean = 70.85 mm: SD = 71.43 mm) with anencephalic fetuses: p = 0.3575 (PV: 5.1 to 159.11 mm, mean = 42.94 mm; SD = 40.11 mm) and PBS fetuses: p > 0.999 (PV: 10.89 to 148.71 mm, mean = 55.4 mm; SD = 63.64 mm). The linear regression analysis indicated that the PV in the control group (r2 = 0.3096; p = 0.0004), anencephalic group (r2 = 0.3778; p = 0.0148) and PBS group (r2 = 0.9821; p 

Read it at the source ↗

Try
Intelligent Search· scoped to this article · not medical adviceSearch the whole library →