W Mohammed1, N F Davis1, S Elamin1, P Ahern1, C M Brady1, P Sweeney2. 1. Department of Urology, Mercy University Hospital, Cork, Co Cork, Ireland. 2. Department of Urology, Mercy University Hospital, Cork, Co Cork, Ireland. psweeney@muh.ie.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare sextant and 12 core transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) and to determine whether 12-core prostate biopsies are associated with a higher incidence of insignificant prostate cancer and complications. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on all patients with a positive TRUS biopsy for prostate cancer between January 2011 and December 2013. Group A underwent a sextant core prostate biopsy and group B underwent a 12-core prostate biopsy. Outcome variables were cancer detection rates, oncological outcomes, incidence of clinically insignificant PCa and incidence of biopsy associated complications. Exclusion criteria included a negative TRUS biopsy and metastatic prostate cancer. RESULT: In total 718 prostate biopsies were performed and 286 patients met inclusion criteria (143 patients in each group). The overall cancer detection rate was 43 % in group A compared to 53 % in group B (p = 0.03). In group A, 31 (21.7 %) patients proceeded to open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) compared to 36 (25.2 %) in group B (p = 0.7). Sextant biopsies were associated with a significantly higher rate of upgrading compared to 12-core biopsies in RRP specimens (51.6 versus 25 % respectively, p < 0.01). The incidence of clinically insignificant PCa was 10.5 % in group A versus 14.7 % in group B (p = 0.2). The incidence of urosepsis post biopsy was 0.7 % in both groups (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Twelve-core biopsies were associated with higher PCa cancer detection rates, greater accuracy for Gleason grading and no differences for detecting clinically insignificant PCa or urosepsis compared to sextant biopsies.
AIMS: To compare sextant and 12 core transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies for detecting prostate cancer (PCa) and to determine whether 12-core prostate biopsies are associated with a higher incidence of insignificant prostate cancer and complications. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on all patients with a positive TRUS biopsy for prostate cancer between January 2011 and December 2013. Group A underwent a sextant core prostate biopsy and group B underwent a 12-core prostate biopsy. Outcome variables were cancer detection rates, oncological outcomes, incidence of clinically insignificant PCa and incidence of biopsy associated complications. Exclusion criteria included a negative TRUS biopsy and metastatic prostate cancer. RESULT: In total 718 prostate biopsies were performed and 286 patients met inclusion criteria (143 patients in each group). The overall cancer detection rate was 43 % in group A compared to 53 % in group B (p = 0.03). In group A, 31 (21.7 %) patients proceeded to open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) compared to 36 (25.2 %) in group B (p = 0.7). Sextant biopsies were associated with a significantly higher rate of upgrading compared to 12-core biopsies in RRP specimens (51.6 versus 25 % respectively, p < 0.01). The incidence of clinically insignificant PCa was 10.5 % in group A versus 14.7 % in group B (p = 0.2). The incidence of urosepsis post biopsy was 0.7 % in both groups (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Twelve-core biopsies were associated with higher PCa cancer detection rates, greater accuracy for Gleason grading and no differences for detecting clinically insignificant PCa or urosepsis compared to sextant biopsies.
Authors: A Takenaka; R Hara; T Ishimura; T Fujii; Y Jo; A Nagai; M Fujisawa Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2007-05-29 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: David M Pinkstaff; Todd C Igel; Steven P Petrou; Gregory A Broderick; Michael J Wehle; Paul R Young Journal: Urology Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Guillaume Ploussard; Jonathan I Epstein; Rodolfo Montironi; Peter R Carroll; Manfred Wirth; Marc-Oliver Grimm; Anders S Bjartell; Francesco Montorsi; Stephen J Freedland; Andreas Erbersdobler; Theodorus H van der Kwast Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Peter A Pinto; Paul H Chung; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Angelo A Baccala; Jochen Kruecker; Compton J Benjamin; Sheng Xu; Pingkun Yan; Samuel Kadoury; Celene Chua; Julia K Locklin; Baris Turkbey; Joanna H Shih; Stacey P Gates; Carey Buckner; Gennady Bratslavsky; W Marston Linehan; Neil D Glossop; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Caroline M A Hoeks; Martijn G Schouten; Joyce G R Bomers; Stefan P Hoogendoorn; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Thomas Hambrock; Henk Vergunst; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Hiroyuki Nakanishi; Xuemei Wang; Atsushi Ochiai; Kiril Trpkov; Asli Yilmaz; J Bryan Donnelly; John W Davis; Patricia Troncoso; R Joseph Babaian Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860