TABLE 1. Paper Search Results, With Key SUS Conclusions, Organised by Year Published.

Ref.	Focus	Cohort Size	SUS Position	Equation	Reference	Over/Under/Accurate (SUS w.r.t. reference PV)	Correlation (SUS w.r.t. reference)	Stratification	SUS Conclusions
[16]	PV	15	AUS	PE	Specimen	-	-	-	Useful applications where approximate assessments are required.
[17]	PV	8	AUS	Sphere	Specimen	-	•	-	AUS is more accurate than CT and clinical estimates in PV estimation.
[29]	PV	29	AUS	Sphere	Specimen	-	Highly significant correlation. •	Better correlation for larger prostates.	AUS should receive more attention as it is an accurate predictor of PV.
[38]	PV	50	AUS	PE	Specimen	-	Correlation. •	-	AUS is an accurate method for estimation of PV.
[44]	PV	33	AUS	PE	Specimen	-	• Insignificant difference.	-	AUS is reasonably accurate with good correlation to specimen weight.
[45]	PV	85	AUS	-	Specimen	-	-	-	Close correlation between AUS and sum of resected and postoperative PV.
[27]	PV	26	AUS	PE	Specimen	Underestimated.	Pearson's correlation. • Spearman's correlation.	-	AUS is quite accurate in PV estimation has definite value in the assessment of prostatic size.
[46]	PV	88	AUS	-	TRUS	-	• Correlated well with good agreement.	-	AUS correlated well with TRUS.
[39]	PV	107	AUS	Sphere	Specimen	-	Pearson's correlation.	-	AUS was well adapted for screening of prostatic diseases.
[30]	PV	50	TPUS	PE1	TRUS	-	Student's two-tailed t-test. •	-	TPUS measurements are comparable to TRUS in dimensions and volume.
[40]	PV	80	TPUS	PE	Specimen	-	Pearson's correlation to TPUS. • Specimen: • AUS: .	-	TPUS is accurate in evaluating PV.
[41]	PV	44	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Pearson's correlation. •	-	No statistically significant difference between AUS and TRUS.
[42]	PV	95	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Pearson's correlation. •	-	AUS could replace TRUS for PV determination.
[23]	PV	196	AUS	PE	TRUS	Overestimated: Underestimated: Accurate:.	-	-	AUS less accurate than TRUS
[47]	PSAD	420	AUS	PE5	Biopsy	-	PSAD ROC curve areas. • TRUS: • AUS: Sensitivity and specificity. • TRUS: and • AUS: and .	-	AUS derived PSAD is as useful as TRUS derived PSAD.
[31]	PV	22	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Spearman's correlation4. • 100mL: • 200mL: • 300mL: • 400mL: • 500mL:	-	AUS PV correlates well with TRUS PV when bladder volume .
[32]	PV	200	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Pearson's correlation.	-	No statistical difference between AUS PV and TRUS PV.
[48]	ML	11	AUS	-	-	-	• -	-	-
[22]	PV + PSAD	238	AUS	PE2	TRUS	Overestimated: Underestimated: Accurate: .	Pearson's correlation (PV). • All: • >50mL: • <50mL:	Better correlation for larger prostates.	AUS PSAD is worthwhile as it significantly improves on PSA alone and can reduce unnecessary biopsies.
[43]	PV	287	TPUS	PE	TRUS	-	Interclass correlation (PV). •	-	TPUS provides an accurate alternative to TRUS.
[25]	PV	94	AUS	PE	TRUS	Overestimated: Underestimated Accurate: .	Pearson's correlation. • All: • Beginner: • Trained: • Expert:.		-
[19]	PV	100	AUS	PE	TRUS	Overestimated by .	Pearson's correlation. • All: • >50mL: • <=50mL:	Better correlation for larger prostates.	Strong correlation between AUS and TRUS for volume and dimensions. AUS can be an alternative to TRUS.
[20]	PV	71	AUS	PE	Specimen	Overestimated by	Pearson's correlation. • .	-	AUS shows significant overestimation of specimen weight.
[21]	PV + PSAD	60	AUS	PE	Specimen	Overestimated.	Pearson's correlation. • PV: . • PSAD: .	-	AUS PSAD showed no statistically significant difference to specimen PSAD. AUS overestimation of specimen volume statically significant.
[24]	PV	163	AUS	PE	Specimen	Underestimated by .	95% confidence interval. •	Most accurate estimation between 41g-60g..	AUS PV correlated well with specimen.
[33]	PV	40	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Pearson's correlation. •	-	AUS does not agree sufficiently with TRUS according to LOA.
[34]	PV	60	AUS	NR	Specimen	-	Pearson's correlation. • r=.77, p<.001. Coefficient of linear regression.	-	Significant correlation between AUS and specimen.
[35]	PV	49	AUS	PE	TRUS	-	Spearman's correlation. •	-	TRUS and AUS are not different in PV estimation.
[49]	ML	210	AUS	-	-	-	-	-	-
[28]	PV	236	AUS	PE	TRUS	Mix of overestimation, underestimation, and accurate estimation.	Pearson's correlation. • Intraclass correlation. •	Better agreement5 for smaller prostates.	AUS excellent surrogate for TRUS in most cases, but not for larger prostates.
[18]	PV	170	AUS	PE	Specimen	Overestimated.	Spearman's correlation. •	-	Positive correlation between AUS and specimen.
[36]	PV	92	AUS	PE	Specimen	-	Pearson's correlation. •	-	AUS showed statistically significant difference to specimen.
[26]	PV	98	AUS	PE	Specimen	Overestimated: . Underestimated: . Accurate:	Pearson's correlation. • All: • <30g: • 30g-60g: • >60g:	Better correlation for larger prostates.	AUS comparable, and acceptable alternative, to TRUS.
[50]	ML	305	AUS	PE	-	-	-	-	-
[37]	PV + PSAD	64	AUS / TPUS	PE	mpMRI	-	Interclass correlation (PV). • TAUS to MRI: • TPUS to MRI: .	-	AUS and TPUS PV has good agreement with MRI PV. AUS and TPUS PSAD has good agreement with MRI PSAD.

Bolded Rows Attempted to Automate All/Part of the PV Estimation Process. PE – Prolate Ellipsoid From (2). PE¹ – Modification of (2): or . PE² – Modification of (2): . PE³ – Modification of (2): . Spearman's Correlation⁴: With Respect to Bladder Volume. Agreement⁵: As Determined Using Bland Altman Plots and Limits-of-Agreement