Literature DB >> 19720449

Biopsy schemes with the fewest cores for detecting 95% of the prostate cancers detected by a 24-core biopsy.

Vincenzo Scattoni1, Marco Raber, Firas Abdollah, Marco Roscigno, Federico Dehò, Diego Angiolilli, Carmen Maccagnano, Andrea Gallina, Umberto Capitanio, Massimo Freschi, Claudio Doglioni, Patrizio Rigatti, Francesco Montorsi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The most efficient number and location of prostate biopsies remains a matter of debate.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the combination (number and location) of sampling sites that permits the detection of 95% of the prostate cancers (PCa) detected by a 24-core biopsy (24PBx). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred and seventeen consecutive patients with a suspicion of PCa were prospectively enrolled. INTERVENTION: A transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic 24PBx was prospectively performed with local anesthesia in an outpatient setting. The 24PBx was obtained by the overlapping of medial sextant, lateral sextant, octant subcapsular, and quadrant transition cores. Before fixation, each single core was individually marked and inked according to the prostatic location sampled. MEASUREMENTS: We relied on a classification and regression tree analysis to identify four subgroups of patients with different PCa detection risk at initial biopsy, according to their clinical characteristics. Subsequently, we set the cancer-positive rate of the 24PBx at 100% and calculated PCa detection rates for 255 possible combinations of sampling sites. We selected the most advantageous biopsy scheme (defined as the combination of sampling sites that detected 95% of all the cancers with the minimal number of biopsy cores) for each patient subgroup. Finally, we internally validated the tumor detection rates by using the 10-fold cross-validation method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The 24PBx detected PCa in 289 patients (46.8%). The analysis revealed that the most advantageous schemes for patients with a negative digital rectal exam (DRE), prostate volume (PV) < or =60 cm(3), and age < or =65 yr was a combination of a 16-core biopsy. For patients with a negative DRE, PV < or =60 cm(3), and age >65 yr or a negative DRE and PV >60 cm(3), the most advantageous scheme was two different combinations of a 14-core biopsy. Finally, the sampling that permits detection of 95% of cancers in patients with a positive DRE was a combination of a 10-core biopsy.
CONCLUSIONS: The most beneficial scheme varied according to the clinical characteristics of the patients. We propose a user-friendly flowchart to identify the most advantageous set of sampling sites according to patients' characteristics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19720449     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.08.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  17 in total

1.  Hematoma in Retzius' space following US-guided prostate biopsy: evidence of the diagnostic accuracy using transrectal end-fire probe in the anterior prostate gland.

Authors:  Lucio Dell'atti
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2014-01-09

2.  Comparative efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound targeted versus systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Michael Josef Mitterberger; Friedrich Aigner; Wolfgang Horninger; Hanno Ulmer; Silvio Cavuto; Ethan J Halpern; Ferdinand Frauscher
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Ege Can Serefoglu; Serkan Altinova; Nevzat Serdar Ugras; Egemen Akincioglu; Erem Asil; M Derya Balbay
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Contemporary pathologic characteristics and oncologic outcomes of prostate cancers missed by 6- and 12-core biopsy and diagnosed with a 21-core biopsy protocol.

Authors:  Idir Ouzaid; Evanguelos Xylinas; Alexandre Campeggi; Andras Hoznek; Dimitri Vordos; Claude-Clément Abbou; Francis Vacherot; Laurent Salomon; Alexandre de la Taille; Guillaume Ploussard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores?

Authors:  Vincenzo Scattoni; Carmen Maccagnano; Umberto Capitanio; Andrea Gallina; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-06-08       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy: technical features and preliminary results.

Authors:  Valeria Panebianco; Flavio Barchetti; Guglielmo Manenti; Tommaso Aversa; Carlo Catalano; Giovanni Simonetti
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 7.  Optimization of prostate biopsy: review of technique and complications.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; James S Wysock; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.241

8.  Prostate cancer detection rates in different biopsy schemes. Which cores for which patients?

Authors:  Luigi Cormio; Vincenzo Scattoni; Fabrizio Lorusso; Antonia Perrone; Giuseppe Di Fino; Oscar Selvaggio; Francesca Sanguedolce; Pantaleo Bufo; Francesco Montorsi; Giuseppe Carrieri
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-11-25       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  A biomedical engineering approach to mitigate the errors of prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Hashim Uddin Ahmed; Mark Emberton; Gordon Kepner; Jeremy Kepner
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Recent advances in magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Uri Lindner
Journal:  F1000 Med Rep       Date:  2010-12-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.