Literature DB >> 28299763

The Efficacy of Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy Versus Transperineal Template Biopsy of the Prostate in Diagnosing Prostate Cancer in Men with Previous Negative Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Biopsy.

Shady Nafie1, Michael Wanis2, Masood Khan2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We have previously demonstrated that transperineal template prostate biopsy (TPTPB) has a significantly higher cancer detection rate compared to transrectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) biopsy in biopsy naive men with a PSA < 20 ng/mL. We, therefore, performed a prospective study to determine whether TPTPB is still superior to TRUS biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer in men with persistently elevated PSA after one previous negative set of TRUS biopsies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 42 patients with a background of one previous negative set of TRUS biopsy, persistently elevated PSA (but < 20 ng/mL) and benign feeling digital rectal examination (DRE) underwent simultaneous standard 12-core TRUS biopsy and 36-core TPTPB under general anaesthesia. We determined the prostate cancer detection rate between the two diagnostic modalities.
RESULTS: Mean age was 65 years (range: 50-75), mean prostate volume was 59 cc (range: 21-152), mean PSA is 8.3 ng/L (range: 4.4-19), mean time difference between the study and the previous TRUS biopsy was 33 months (range: 1-150) with mean PSA velocity of 0.7 ng/mL/year (range: 0-8). Out of the 42 patients, 22 (52%) had benign pathology. Of the 20 patients (48%) diagnosed with prostate cancer, 4 (10%) had positive results in both TRUS biopsy and TPTPB, 1 (2%) had positive result in TRUS biopsy with negative TPTPB, while 15 (36%) had negative TRUS biopsy with positive TPTPB. Hence, TRUS biopsy detected cancer in 5/42 (12%) patients versus (19/42) 45% detected by TPTPB (P < 0.01). 13/19 (68%) of cancers detected by TPTPB had Gleason score ≥7. A total of 82/141 (58%) of positive cores was found in the anterior zone. One patient (2%) experienced urosepsis, 2 (5%) temporary urinary retention, 14 (34%) mild haematuria and 13 (32%) haematospermia.
CONCLUSION: TPTPB still shows a significantly higher prostate cancer detection rate compared to TRUS biopsy (12% versus 45%, P < 0.01) in men with a previous set of negative TRUS biopsy, persistently elevated PSA (but < 20 ng/mL) and benign feeling prostate on DRE.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28299763

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol J        ISSN: 1735-1308            Impact factor:   1.510


  10 in total

1.  Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate 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

2.  Handling and reporting of transperineal template prostate biopsy in Europe: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP).

Authors:  Solene-Florence Kammerer-Jacquet; Eva Compérat; Lars Egevad; Ondra Hes; Jon Oxley; Murali Varma; Glen Kristiansen; Daniel M Berney
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  Gleason grade accuracy of transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsies in MRI-naïve patients.

Authors:  Liang G Qu; Modher Al-Shawi; Tess Howard; Nathan Papa; Cedric Poyet; Brian Kelly; A J Matthew Egan; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Damien Bolton; Gregory S Jack
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  A Nationwide Analysis of Risk of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Mortality following an Initial Negative Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy with Long-Term Followup.

Authors:  Sandra Miriam Kawa; Hein Vincent Stroomberg; Signe Benzon Larsen; John Thomas Helgstrand; Birgitte Grønkær Toft; Andrew Julian Vickers; Klaus Brasso; Martin Andreas Røder
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 7.600

5.  MRI Screening and MRI/US Fusion-Guided Transperineal Biopsy in Detecting Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Hongqing Yin; Jun Shao; Huan Song; Wei Ding; Bin Xu; Hui Cao; Jianming Wang
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec

Review 6.  Imaging for the selection and monitoring of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Maria C Velasquez; Nachiketh Soodana Prakash; Vivek Venkatramani; Bruno Nahar; Sanoj Punnen
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-04

7.  The clinical utility of transperineal template-guided saturation prostate biopsy for risk stratification after transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy.

Authors:  Wan Song; Minyong Kang; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Il Seo; Seong Soo Jeon; Hyun Moo Lee; Hwang Gyun Jeon
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2019-09-11

8.  A Model to Detect Significant Prostate Cancer Integrating Urinary Peptide and Extracellular Vesicle RNA Data.

Authors:  Shea P O'Connell; Maria Frantzi; Agnieszka Latosinska; Martyn Webb; William Mullen; Martin Pejchinovski; Mark Salji; Harald Mischak; Colin S Cooper; Jeremy Clark; Daniel S Brewer
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 6.575

9.  Combining prostate-specific antigen density with prostate imaging reporting and data system score version 2.1 to improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Yin Lei; Tian Jie Li; Peng Gu; Yu Kun Yang; Lei Zhao; Chao Gao; Juan Hu; Xiao Dong Liu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 5.738

10.  Selective biomarkers for inflammation and infection are associated with post-operative complications following transperineal template prostate biopsy (TTPB): a single-centre observational clinical pilot-study.

Authors:  Nana Yaa Frempomaa Snyper; Joanne Pike; Kingsley Ekwueme; Iqbal Shergill; Stephen Fôn Hughes
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 4.981

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.