Literature DB >> 17710548

How adequate is digital rectal exam for prostate cancer screening at colonoscopy? Can adequacy be improved?

John B Marshall1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Screening by digital rectal exam (DRE) has been advocated as a means of detecting early-stage prostate cancer. We sought to determine the adequacy of prostate palpation at DRE at colonoscopy, and to devise a method of improving adequacy when the gland is incompletely felt.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adequacy of prostate palpation in the left lateral position was prospectively assessed in 200 males 40 years or older undergoing colonoscopy, and correlated with body mass index (BMI) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) weight categories. If the prostate was incompletely felt, the patient was asked to flex his knee(s) up toward his chest, and then the exam was repeated.
RESULTS: The prostate was incompletely felt on initial DRE in 65 of 200 patients (32.5%). Raising the knee(s) toward the chest permitted complete palpation in 62 of those 65 cases. Incomplete palpation showed a strong correlation with BMI (P < 0.0001) and weight category: 3/36 (8.3%) for patients with normal body weight, 14/89 (15.7%) for overweight, 42/68 (61.8%) for obesity, and 6/7 (85.7%) for extreme obesity (P < 0.0001). There were 13 patients in whom no part of the prostate gland could be felt on the initial DRE, and which also correlated with NIH weight class (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The prostate gland is often incompletely palpated at DRE in the left lateral position at colonoscopy, and shows a strong correlation with obesity. Adequacy can be dramatically improved by having the patient raise his knee(s) up toward his chest, a maneuver that takes just seconds to perform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17710548     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-007-9910-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  4 in total

1.  American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.

Authors:  Robert A Smith; Vilma Cokkinides; Andrew C von Eschenbach; Bernard Levin; Carmel Cohen; Carolyn D Runowicz; Stephen Sener; Debbie Saslow; Harmon J Eyre
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

2.  Cancer statistics, 2002.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Andrea Thomas; Taylor Murray; Michael Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 3.  Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Russell Harris; Kathleen N Lohr
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-12-03       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Underutilization of digital rectal examination when screening for prostate cancer.

Authors:  G Divakara Murthy; Daniel P Byron; Donald Pasquale
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2004-02-09
  4 in total
  2 in total

1.  Anatomical basis of digital rectal examination.

Authors:  E Joguet; R Robert; J J Labat; T Riant; M Guérineau; O Hamel; J M Louppe
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  Why I cannot find the prostate? Behind the subjectivity of rectal exam.

Authors:  Dmitry Koulikov; Ariel Mamber; Alon Fridmans; Wael Abu Arafeh; Ofer Z Shenfeld
Journal:  ISRN Urol       Date:  2012-02-15
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.