Extended and saturation needle biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer

Current Urology Reports

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 226-230

  Chrouser, Kristin L ^b   Lieber, Michael M ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF UROLOGY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Peripheral Zone; Prostate Biopsy; Prostate Cancer; Prostate Needle Biopsy; Sextant Biopsy

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT SELECTION; PROSTATE TUMOR; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 4344595486     PISSN: 15272737     EISSN: 15346285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-004-0041-7     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA: Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 1989, 142:71–74.
2. Gann PH, Hennekens CH, Stampfer MJ: A prospective evaluation of plasma prostate-specific antigen for detection of prostatic cancer. JAMA 1995, 273:289–294. DOI: 10.1001/jama.273.4.289
3. Punglia RS, D’Amico AV, Catalona WJ, et al.: Effect of verification bias on screening for prostate cancer by measurement of prostate-specific antigen. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:335–342. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021659
4. Jain S, Bhojwani AG, Mellon JK: Improving the utility of prostate specific antigen (PSA) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: the use of PSA derivatives and novel markers. Postgrad Med J 2002, 78:646–650. DOI: 10.1136/pmj.78.925.646
5. Ozen H, Aygun C, Ergen A, et al.: Combined use of prostatespecific antigen derivatives decreases the number of unnecessary biopsies to detect prostate cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2001, 24:610–613. DOI: 10.1097/00000421-200112000-00017
6. Scherr DS, Eastham J, Ohori M, Scardino PT: Prostate biopsy techniques and indications: When, where, and how? Semin Urol Oncol 2002, 20:18–31. This article provides a detailed description of TRUS biopsy technique and addresses the related issues of pathologic interpretation of biopsies and the relationship of biopsy to prognosis. DOI: 10.1053/suro.2002.30395
7. Garcia-Segura JM, Sanchez-Chapado M, Ibarburen C, et al.: In vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of diseased prostate: spectroscopic features of malignant versus benign pathology. Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 17:755–765. DOI: 10.1016/S0730-725X(99)00006-5
8. Halpern EJ, Frauscher F, Rosenberg M, Gomella LG: Directed biopsy during contrast-enhanced sonography of the prostate. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 178:915–919.
9. Chon CH, Lai FC, McNeal JE, Presti JC Jr: Use of extended systematic sampling in patients with a prior negative prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2002, 167:2457–2460. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65004-5
10. Presti JC Jr: Prostate biopsy: How many cores are enough? Urol Oncol 2003, 21:135–140. This recent publication is a concise review of the literature and provides a thoughtful evaluation of several extended biopsy schemes.
11. Durkan GC, Sheikh N, Johnson P, et al.: Improving prostate cancer detection with an extended-core transrectal ultrasonographyguided prostate biopsy protocol. BJU Int 2002, 89:33–39. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02555.x
12. Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL: Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997, 157:199–202. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65322-9
13. Davis M, Sofer M, Kim SS, Soloway MS: The procedure of transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a survey of patient preparation and biopsy technique. J Urol 2002, 167:566–570. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)69087-6
14. Jones JS, Oder M, Zippe CD: Saturation prostate biopsy with periprostatic block can be performed in office. J Urol 2002, 168:2108–2110. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64307-8
15. Rodriguez LV, Terris MK: Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature. J Urol 1998, 160:2115–2120. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62255-9
16. Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM: Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 2001, 166:86–91. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66083-1
17. Borboroglu PG, Comer SW, Riffenburgh RH, Amling CL: Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies. J Urol 2000, 163:158–162. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67994-3
18. Fleshner N, Klotz L: Role of “saturation biopsy” in the detection of prostate cancer among difficult diagnostic cases. Urology 2002, 60:93–97. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01625-4
19. Stamey TA, Freiha FS, McNeal JE, et al.: Localized prostate cancer: relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 1993, 71:933–938. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930201)71:3+<933::AID-CNCR2820711408>3.0.CO;2-L
20. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB: Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994, 271:368–374. DOI: 10.1001/jama.271.5.368
21. Dugan JA, Bostwick DG, Myers RP, et al.: The definition and preoperative prediction of clinically insignificant prostate cancer. JAMA 1996, 275:288–294. DOI: 10.1001/jama.275.4.288
22. Stroumbakis N, Cookson MS, Reuter VE, Fair WR: Clinical significance of repeat sextant biopsies in prostate cancer patients. Urology 1997, 49:113–118. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00178-7
23. Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, et al.: The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 1997, 50:562–566. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00306-3
24. Keetch DW, Catalona WJ, Smith DS: Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. J Urol 1994, 151:1571–1574.
25. Stamey TA: Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995, 45:2–12. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(95)96168-2
26. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carter HB: Importance of posterolateral needle biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. Urology 2001, 57:1112–1116. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(01)00979-7
27. King CR, Long JP: Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem? Int J Cancer 2000, 90:326–330. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0215(20001220)90:6<326::AID-IJC3>3.0.CO;2-J
28. San Francisco IF, DeWolf WC, Rosen S, et al.: Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003, 169:136–140. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64053-0
29. Chen ME, Troncoso P, Johnston DA, et al.: Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis. J Urol 1997, 158:2168–2175. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68188-6
30. Presti JC Jr, O’Dowd GJ, Miller MC, et al.: Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol 2003, 169:125–129. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64051-7
31. Naughton CK, Miller DC, Mager DE, et al.: A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J Urol 2000, 164:388–392. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67367-3
32. Augustin H, Erbersdobler A, Graefen M, et al.: Differences in biopsy features between prostate cancers located in the transition and peripheral zone. BJU Int 2003, 91:477–481. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2003.04140.x
33. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Sauvageot J, Carter HB: Use of repeat sextant and transition zone biopsies for assessing extent of prostate cancer. J Urol 1997, 158:1886–1890. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64159-4
34. Liu IJ, Macy M, Lai YH, Terris MK: Critical evaluation of the current indications for transition zone biopsies. Urology 2001, 57:1117–1120. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(01)00944-X
35. Zeng J, Bauer J, Zhang W, et al.: Prostate biopsy protocols: 3D visualization-based evaluation and clinical correlation. Comput Aided Surg 2001, 6:14–21. DOI: 10.1002/igs.1006
36. Stricker HJ, Ruddock LJ, Wan J, Belville WD: Detection of nonpalpable prostate cancer: a mathematical and laboratory model. Br J Urol 1993, 71:43–46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.1993.tb15878.x
37. Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, et al.: Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 1997, 49:55–59. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00360-3
38. Chen ME, Troncoso P, Johnston D, et al.: Prostate cancer detection: relationship to prostate size. Urology 1999, 53:764–768. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00574-3
39. Chen ME, Troncoso P, Tang K, et al.: Comparison of prostate biopsy schemes by computer simulation. Urology 1999, 53:951–960. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00639-6
40. Naughton CK, Smith DS, Humphrey PA, et al.: Clinical and pathologic tumor characteristics of prostate cancer as a function of the number of biopsy cores: a retrospective study. Urology 1998, 52:808–813. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00344-6
41. Lopez-Corona E, Ohori M, Scardino PT, et al.: A nomogram for predicting a positive repeat prostate biopsy in patients with a previous negative biopsy session. J Urol 2003, 170:1184–1188. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000087451.64657.fa