Literature DB >> 24908067

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

Vincenzo Scattoni1, Carmen Maccagnano, Umberto Capitanio, Andrea Gallina, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The optimal random prostate biopsy scheme (PBx) in the initial and repeated setting is still an issue of controversy. We performed an analysis of the recent literature about the prostate biopsy techniques.
METHODS: We performed a clinical and critical literature review by searching MEDLINE database from January 2005 up to January 2014. Electronic searches were limited to the English language, and the keywords prostate cancer, prostate biopsy, transrectal ultrasound, transperineal prostate biopsy were used.
RESULTS: Prostate biopsy strategy in initial setting. According to the literature and the major international guidelines, the recommended approach in initial setting is still the extended scheme (EPBx) (12 cores). However, there is now a growing evidence in the literature that (a) saturation PBx (>20 cores) (SPBx) might be indicated in patients with PSA <10 ng/ml or low PSA density or large prostate and (b) an individualized approach with more than 12 cores according to the clinical characteristics of the patients may optimize cancer detection in the single patient. Moreover, in the era of multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI), EPBx or SPBX may be substituted by mpMRI-targeted biopsies that have demonstrated superiority over systematic random biopsies for the detection of clinically significant disease and representation of disease burden, while deploying fewer cores. Prostate biopsy strategy in repeat setting. How and how many cores should be taken in the different scenarios in the repeated setting is still unclear. SPBx clearly improves cancer detection if clinical suspicion persists after previous biopsy with negative findings and is able to provide an accurate prediction of prostate tumour volume and grade. Nevertheless, international guidelines do not strongly recommended SPBx in all situations of repeated setting. In the active surveillance and in focal therapy protocols, the optimal schemes have to be defined.
CONCLUSIONS: The course of PBx has changed significantly from sextant biopsies to systematic and from extended to SPBx schemes. The issue about the number and location of the cores is still a matter of debate both in initial and in repeat setting. At present, EPBx is sufficient in most of the cases to provide adequate diagnosis and prostate cancer characterization in the initial setting, while SPBx seems to be necessary in repeat setting. The PBx schemes are evolving also because the scenario in which a PBx is necessary is changing. Random prostate PBx do not represent the future, while imaging target biopsy are becoming more popular.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24908067     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1335-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  70 in total

1.  Prostate cancer: contrast-enhanced us for detection.

Authors:  E J Halpern; M Rosenberg; L G Gomella
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Is an initial saturation prostate biopsy scheme better than an extended scheme for detection of prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xingkang Jiang; Shimiao Zhu; Guowei Feng; Zhihong Zhang; Changying Li; Hui Li; Chao Wang; Yong Xu
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-02-10       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  The optimal rebiopsy prostatic scheme depends on patient clinical characteristics: results of a recursive partitioning analysis based on a 24-core systematic scheme.

Authors:  Vincenzo Scattoni; Marco Raber; Umberto Capitanio; Firas Abdollah; Marco Roscigno; Diego Angiolilli; Carmen Maccagnano; Andrea Gallina; Antonio Saccà; Massimo Freschi; Claudio Doglioni; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-07-30       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy.

Authors:  J Stephen Jones; Amit Patel; Lynn Schoenfield; John C Rabets; Craig D Zippe; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  High yield of saturation prostate biopsy for patients with previous negative biopsies and small prostates.

Authors:  Kamran P Sajadi; Timothy Kim; Martha K Terris; James A Brown; Ronald W Lewis
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Development, validation, and head-to-head comparison of logistic regression-based nomograms and artificial neural network models predicting prostate cancer on initial extended biopsy.

Authors:  Satoru Kawakami; Noboru Numao; Yuhei Okubo; Fumitaka Koga; Shinya Yamamoto; Kazutaka Saito; Yasuhisa Fujii; Junji Yonese; Hitoshi Masuda; Kazunori Kihara; Iwao Fukui
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Contemporary impact of transrectal ultrasound lesions for prostate cancer detection.

Authors:  Rahmi Onur; Peter J Littrup; J Edson Pontes; Fernando J Bianco
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Prostate cancer detection with office based saturation biopsy in a repeat biopsy population.

Authors:  John C Rabets; J Stephen Jones; Amit Patel; Craig D Zippe
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Saturation biopsies on autopsied prostates for detecting and characterizing prostate cancer.

Authors:  Nicolas B Delongchamps; Gustavo de la Roza; Richard Jones; Mary Jumbelic; Gabriel P Haas
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Prevalence of prostate cancer among men with a prostate-specific antigen level < or =4.0 ng per milliliter.

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

View more
  9 in total

1.  Targeted MRI-guided prostate biopsy: are two biopsy cores per MRI-lesion required?

Authors:  L Schimmöller; M Quentin; D Blondin; F Dietzel; A Hiester; C Schleich; C Thomas; R Rabenalt; H E Gabbert; P Albers; G Antoch; C Arsov
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Inflammation and prostate cancer: friends or foe?

Authors:  Gianluigi Taverna; Elisa Pedretti; Giuseppe Di Caro; Elena Monica Borroni; Federica Marchesi; Fabio Grizzi
Journal:  Inflamm Res       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 4.575

Review 3.  Follow-up of negative MRI-targeted prostate biopsies: when are we missing cancer?

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

Review 4.  All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.

Authors:  Derek J Lomas; Hashim U Ahmed
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for detection of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Authors:  Jianxin Xue; Zhiqiang Qin; Hongzhou Cai; Chuanjie Zhang; Xiao Li; Weizhang Xu; Jingyuan Wang; Zicheng Xu; Bin Yu; Ting Xu; Qin Zou
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-04

6.  What is an acceptable false negative rate in the detection of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Jan F M Verbeek; Monique J Roobol
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

7.  Extent and predictors of grade upgrading and downgrading in an Australian cohort according to the new prostate cancer grade groupings.

Authors:  Kerri Beckmann; Michael O'Callaghan; Andrew Vincent; Penelope Cohen; Martin Borg; David Roder; Sue Evans; Jeremy Millar; Kim Moretti
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2019-03-07

8.  Emerging Technologies for the Detection of Cancer Micrometastasis.

Authors:  Xuqing Mao; Ruyi Mei; Shuxian Yu; Lan Shou; Wenzheng Zhang; Keshuai Li; Zejing Qiu; Tian Xie; Xinbing Sui
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec

9.  Comparison between Ultrasound Guided Transperineal and Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Le-Hang Guo; Rong Wu; Hui-Xiong Xu; Jun-Mei Xu; Jian Wu; Shuai Wang; Xiao-Wan Bo; Bo-Ji Liu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.