| Literature DB >> 25798001 |
Pedro Marinho Lopes1, Luís Sepúlveda2, Rui Ramos3, Pedro Sousa3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study was aimed at evaluating the contribution of transrectal prostate ultrasound in the screening for prostate neoplasias and in the guidance of prostate biopsies.Entities:
Keywords: Biópsia dirigida por imagem; Diagnostic techniques and procedures; Imaging-guided biopsy; Neoplasia prostática; Prostatic neoplasia; Rastreamento; Screening; Técnicas e procedimentos diagnósticos; Ultrasonography; Ultrassonografia
Year: 2015 PMID: 25798001 PMCID: PMC4366021 DOI: 10.1590/0100-3984.2013.0010
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiol Bras ISSN: 0100-3984
Figure 1True positive prostate nodule. A: Cross-sectional image of prostate gland identifying a hypoechogenic, well delimited nodule located in the middle third of the left peripheral region, measuring 9 mm (cross-sectional axis). B: Sagittal section of the same nodule (longitudinal lenght 13 mm). Histological analysis revealed invasive acinar adenocarcinoma.
Figure 4False positive prostate nodule. A: Cross-sectional sonographic image of prostate gland identifying hypoechogenic, homogeneous, well-defined nodule located in the right middle third of the central gland. B: Sonographic image of the same region identifying the biopsy needle within the previously described nodule. Histological analysis revealed chronic nonspecific prostatitis.
Sample characterization - true positive.
| Case | Tumor percentage in the targeted specimen | Maximum tumor percentage in the other specimens | Gleason score | Age |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 50 | 10 | 7 | 60 |
| 2 | 100 | 90 | 8 | 87 |
| 3 | 40 | 0 | 7 | 69 |
| 4 | 80 | 70 | 7 | 76 |
| 5 | 90 | 90 | 9 | 84 |
| 6 | 90 | 85 | 9 | 70 |
| 7 | 90 | 25 | 8 | 72 |
| 8 | 70 | 70 | 7 | 63 |
| 9 | 50 | 10 | 7 | 66 |
| 10 | 80 | 60 | 9 | 80 |
| 11 | 50 | 20 | 6 | 49 |
| 12 | 80 | 10 | 7 | 76 |
| 13 | 100 | 90 | 7 | 75 |
| 14 | 90 | 80 | 6 | 61 |
| 15 | 60 | 5 | 7 | 64 |
| 16 | 50 | 30 | 8 | 55 |
| 17 | 70 | 80 | 8 | 78 |
| 18 | 100 | 75 | 7 | 62 |
| 19 | 80 | 80 | 8 | 65 |
| 20 | 80 | 80 | 7 | 76 |
| 21 | 80 | 70 | 7 | 65 |
| 22 | 90 | 80 | 8 | 63 |
| 23 | 90 | 50 | 7 | 54 |
| 24 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 72 |
| 25 | 50 | 70 | 8 | 74 |
Tumor representation: suspicious nodule vs. random specimens.
| Group | n | Mean | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suspicious nodule | 25 | 72.60% | 23.05 |
| Other specimens | 25 | 53.40% | 32.81 |
Gleason score.
| Gleason score | Total number of cases | |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | 15 | |
| 7 | 44 | |
| 8 | 13 | |
| 9 | 8 | |
| 10 | 1 | |
| Mean | Standard deviation | |
| Random specimens | 7.21 | 0.91 |
| Suspicious nodules | 7.44 | 0.82 |