CONTEXT: The optimal initial prostate biopsy core number is still an issue with many unanswered questions and significant controversy. OBJECTIVE: To compare diagnostic values of initial saturation prostate biopsy scheme and extended scheme with respect to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, prostate volume (PV), and PSA density (PSAD). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Electronic databases including Medline, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library were searched through November 1, 2012. Experts were consulted, and references from relevant articles were scanned. The meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.1, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Mantel-Haenszel estimates were calculated and pooled under a fixed or random effect model, with data expressed as risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We analyzed eight trials with a total of 11997 participants who underwent transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies for the first time and met inclusion criteria. Studies consisted of one paired design study, two randomized clinical trials, and five nonrandomized studies. Saturation biopsy scheme showed a significant advantage in prostate cancer (PCa) detection over an extended scheme (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.08; p=0.02). In addition, subgroup analyses found a saturation protocol to be superior to an extended protocol in the detection of PCa in men with PSA <10 ng/ml (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.07; p=0.002), PV >40 ml (RD: 0.05; 95%CI, 0.01-0.09; p=0.02), or PSAD <0.25 ng/ml per gram (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.00-0.09; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence indicates that an initial saturation biopsy scheme is more efficient than an extended scheme for PCa detection, especially for those men with lower PSA levels, higher PV, or lower PSAD, without increasing complications and the amount of insignificant cancer.
CONTEXT: The optimal initial prostate biopsy core number is still an issue with many unanswered questions and significant controversy. OBJECTIVE: To compare diagnostic values of initial saturation prostate biopsy scheme and extended scheme with respect to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, prostate volume (PV), and PSA density (PSAD). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Electronic databases including Medline, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library were searched through November 1, 2012. Experts were consulted, and references from relevant articles were scanned. The meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.1, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Mantel-Haenszel estimates were calculated and pooled under a fixed or random effect model, with data expressed as risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We analyzed eight trials with a total of 11997 participants who underwent transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies for the first time and met inclusion criteria. Studies consisted of one paired design study, two randomized clinical trials, and five nonrandomized studies. Saturation biopsy scheme showed a significant advantage in prostate cancer (PCa) detection over an extended scheme (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.08; p=0.02). In addition, subgroup analyses found a saturation protocol to be superior to an extended protocol in the detection of PCa in men with PSA <10 ng/ml (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.07; p=0.002), PV >40 ml (RD: 0.05; 95%CI, 0.01-0.09; p=0.02), or PSAD <0.25 ng/ml per gram (RD: 0.04; 95% CI, 0.00-0.09; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence indicates that an initial saturation biopsy scheme is more efficient than an extended scheme for PCa detection, especially for those men with lower PSA levels, higher PV, or lower PSAD, without increasing complications and the amount of insignificant cancer.
Authors: Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-04-25
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
Authors: Akhil Muthigi; Abhinav Sidana; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Nabeel Shakir; Meet Kadakia; Mahir Maruf; Thomas P Frye; Francesca Mertan; Daniel Su; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Samuel A Gold; Graham R Hale; Jonathan B Bloom; Clayton P Smith; Kareem N Rayn; Vladimir Valera; Bradford J Wood; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Peter A Pinto Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Liza Quintana; Ashley Ward; Sean J Gerrin; Elizabeth M Genega; Seymour Rosen; Martin G Sanda; Andrew A Wagner; Peter Chang; William C DeWolf; Huihui Ye Journal: Urology Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Brian P Calio; Abhinav Sidana; Dordaneh Sugano; Sonia Gaur; Mahir Maruf; Amit L Jain; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Baris Turkbey Journal: J Urol Date: 2018-01-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: E J Bass; A Pantovic; M Connor; R Gabe; A R Padhani; A Rockall; H Sokhi; H Tam; M Winkler; H U Ahmed Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Teemu T Tolonen; Jorma Isola; Antti Kaipia; Jarno Riikonen; Laura Koivusalo; Sanna Huovinen; Marita Laurila; Sinikka Porre; Mika Tirkkonen; Paula Kujala Journal: BMC Clin Pathol Date: 2015-03-08