INTRODUCTION: Prostate biopsies incur the risk of being false-negative and this risk has not yet been evaluated for 12-core prostate biopsy. We calculated the false-negative rate of 12-core prostate biopsy and determined the patient characteristics which might affect detection rate. METHODS: We included 90 prostate cancer patients (mean age of 64, range: 49-77) diagnosed with transrectal ultrasound guided 12-core prostate biopsy between December 2005 and April 2008. All patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy and the 12-core prostate biopsy procedure was repeated on surgical specimen ex-vivo. Results of preoperative and postoperative prostate biopsies were compared. We analyzed the influence of patient age, prostate weight, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, free/total PSA ratio, PSA density and Gleason score on detection rate. RESULTS: In 67.8% of patients, prostate cancer was detected with repeated ex-vivo biopsies using the same mapping postoperatively. We found an increase in PSA level, PSA density and biopsy Gleason score; patient age, decreases in prostate weight and free/total PSA ratio yielded higher detection rates. All cores, except the left-lateral cores, showed mild-moderate or moderate internal consistency. Preoperative in-vivo biopsy Gleason scores remained the same, decreased and increased in 43.3%, 8.9% and 47.8% of patients, respectively, on final specimen pathology. CONCLUSIONS: The detection rate of prostate cancer with 12-core biopsy in patients (all of whom had prostate cancer) was considerably low. Effectively, repeat biopsies can still be negative despite the patient's reality of having prostate cancer. The detection rate is higher if 12-core biopsies are repeated in younger patients, patients with high PSA levels, PSA density and Gleason scores, in addition in patients with smaller prostates, lower free/total PSA ratios.
INTRODUCTION: Prostate biopsies incur the risk of being false-negative and this risk has not yet been evaluated for 12-core prostate biopsy. We calculated the false-negative rate of 12-core prostate biopsy and determined the patient characteristics which might affect detection rate. METHODS: We included 90 prostate cancerpatients (mean age of 64, range: 49-77) diagnosed with transrectal ultrasound guided 12-core prostate biopsy between December 2005 and April 2008. All patients underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy and the 12-core prostate biopsy procedure was repeated on surgical specimen ex-vivo. Results of preoperative and postoperative prostate biopsies were compared. We analyzed the influence of patient age, prostate weight, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, free/total PSA ratio, PSA density and Gleason score on detection rate. RESULTS: In 67.8% of patients, prostate cancer was detected with repeated ex-vivo biopsies using the same mapping postoperatively. We found an increase in PSA level, PSA density and biopsy Gleason score; patient age, decreases in prostate weight and free/total PSA ratio yielded higher detection rates. All cores, except the left-lateral cores, showed mild-moderate or moderate internal consistency. Preoperative in-vivo biopsy Gleason scores remained the same, decreased and increased in 43.3%, 8.9% and 47.8% of patients, respectively, on final specimen pathology. CONCLUSIONS: The detection rate of prostate cancer with 12-core biopsy in patients (all of whom had prostate cancer) was considerably low. Effectively, repeat biopsies can still be negative despite the patient's reality of having prostate cancer. The detection rate is higher if 12-core biopsies are repeated in younger patients, patients with high PSA levels, PSA density and Gleason scores, in addition in patients with smaller prostates, lower free/total PSA ratios.
Authors: Judson D Davies; Monty A Aghazadeh; Sharon Phillips; Shady Salem; Sam S Chang; Peter E Clark; Michael S Cookson; Rodney Davis; S Duke Herrell; David F Penson; Joseph A Smith; Daniel A Barocas Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-10-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Koji Okihara; Carol D Cheli; Alan W Partin; Herbert A Fritche; Daniel W Chan; Lori J Sokoll; Michael K Brawer; Morton K Schwartz; Robert L Vessella; Kevin R Loughlin; Dennis A Johnston; R Joseph Babaian Journal: J Urol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Donna K Pauler; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Howard L Parnes; Lori M Minasian; Leslie G Ford; Scott M Lippman; E David Crawford; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bernd Rosenhammer; Eva M Lausenmeyer; Roman Mayr; Maximilian Burger; Christian Eichelberg Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Marc A Bjurlin; Xiaosong Meng; Julien Le Nobin; James S Wysock; Herbert Lepor; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Samir S Taneja Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-04-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Samir S Taneja; Geert Villeirs; Inderbir S Gill; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore; Veeru Kasivisvanathan Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Arvin K George; Baris Turkbey; Subin G Valayil; Akhil Muthigi; Francesca Mertan; Michael Kongnyuy; Peter A Pinto Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2016-05