Literature DB >> 10492195

Does site specific labeling of sextant biopsy cores predict the site of extracapsular extension in radical prostatectomy surgical specimen.

S S Taneja1, D F Penson, A Epelbaum, T Handler, H Lepor.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determine whether site specific labeling of sextant prostate biopsy cores predicts the site of extracapsular extension in a radical prostatectomy specimen, thereby justifying increased cost of pathological evaluation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1994 and December 1997, 407 radical prostatectomies were performed at our institution by a single surgeon (H. L.). Surgical specimens showing extracapsular extension were examined by a single pathologist (J. M.) to identify the site of extension. Several different methods of submitting transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy cores were used since the majority of cases did not undergo biopsy at our institution. In 243 cases sextant biopsies were labeled right versus left. Of these cases 103 specimen cores were individually labeled. The ability of the positive biopsy core location to predict the location of extracapsular extension in the surgical specimen was determined. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the ability of biopsy core characteristics, including Gleason score, percentage of cancer in the core, core location and number of positive cores in the specimen, to predict the site of extracapsular extension. A similar analysis was performed for the 243 cases with right versus left core labeling.
RESULTS: The positive predictive value was 8.9+/-2.2% for a single positive core to identify the location of extracapsular extension correctly in the individually labeled core cases. The absence of cancer in a sextant biopsy had a negative predictive value of 96.9+/-1.4%. The overall sensitivity was 59.4+/-3.8% for a positive biopsy core. In the right versus left core cases the positive predictive value was 12.9+/-3.0% with a sensitivity of 85.1+/-3.2%. In an individual core Gleason score 8 or greater and/or cancer in more than 50% of tissue enhanced the positive predictive value but not to a clinically useful level. Multivariate logistic regression identified Gleason score, number of positive ipsilateral cores and base position of the positive biopsy as the most predictive variables for the site of extracapsular extension.
CONCLUSIONS: When submitting biopsy specimens by individually labeled core or right versus left core, the positive predictive value of an individual positive core for the location of extracapsular extension is not sufficient to guide the surgical decision to spare or excise a neurovascular bundle. Therefore, the clinical information provided by individually labeled or right versus left core labeling does not justify the increased associated costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10492195

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  9 in total

1.  CUA guidelines on prostate biopsy methodology.

Authors:  Assaad El-Hakim; Sabri Moussa
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Prostate biopsy: targeting cancer for detection and therapy.

Authors:  Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2006

Review 3.  Standards for prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.309

4.  Explainable artificial intelligence to predict the risk of side-specific extraprostatic extension in pre-prostatectomy patients.

Authors:  Jethro C C Kwong; Adree Khondker; Christopher Tran; Emily Evans; Adrian I Cozma; Ashkan Javidan; Amna Ali; Munir Jamal; Thomas Short; Frank Papanikolaou; John R Srigley; Benjamin Fine; Andrew Feifer
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 2.052

5.  Preoperative nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension in Korean men with localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional clinicopathologic study.

Authors:  Jae Seung Chung; Han Yong Choi; Hae-Ryoung Song; Seok-Soo Byun; Seong il Seo; Cheryn Song; Jin Seon Cho; Sang Eun Lee; Hanjong Ahn; Eun Sik Lee; Won-Jae Kim; Moon Kee Chung; Tae Young Jung; Ho Song Yu; Young Deuk Choi
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 6.  Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; H Ballentine Carter; Paul Schellhammer; Michael S Cookson; Leonard G Gomella; Dean Troyer; Thomas M Wheeler; Steven Schlossberg; David F Penson; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  pT3 Predictive Factors in Patients with a Gleason Score of 6 in Prostate Biopsies.

Authors:  Sung Jin Kim; Chang Myon Park; Ki Taek Seong; Sea Young Kim; Han Kwon Kim; Jong Yeon Park
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2011-09-28

8.  Specimen orientation by marking the peripheral end: (potential) clinical advantages in prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Andrea Benedetto Galosi; Giovanni Muzzonigro; Vito Lacetera; Roberta Mazzucchelli
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2011-07-27

9.  Systematic analysis of transrectal prostate biopsies using an ink method and specific histopathologic protocol: a prospective study.

Authors:  David Parada; Nahum Calvo; Karla Peña; Vanesa Morente; Rosana Queralt; Pilar Hernandez; Francesc Riu
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2011-06-09
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.