The impact of core biopsy fragmentation in prostate cancer

International Urology and Nephrology

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 965-969

  Reis, Leonardo Oliveira ^a   Reinato, José Alberto Salvo ^a   Silva, Daniel Carlos ^a   Matheus, Wagner Eduardo ^a   Denardi, Fernandes ^a   Ferreira, Ubirajara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Biopsy artifact; Core fragmentation; Low risk cancer; Prostate biopsy; Up staging

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; BIOPSY TECHNIQUE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORE BIOPSY FRAGMENTATION; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; GLEASON SCORE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; ORGAN WEIGHT; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; TREND STUDY;

AGED; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 78751646334     PISSN: 03011623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-010-9720-0     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. SE Eggener PT Scardino PR Carroll, et al. 2007 Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities J Urol 178 2260 2267 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.072 17936815 (Pubitemid 350052204)
2. TA Stamey 1995 Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies Urology 45 2 12 1:STN:280:DyaK2M7hslahsw%3D%3D 10.1016/S0090-4295(95)96168-2 7817477
3. JC Presti Jr JJ Chang V Bhargava, et al. 2000 The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include eight rather than six biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial J Urol 163 163 167 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67995-5 10604337
4. SY Eskicorapci F Guliyev B Akdogan, et al. 2005 Individualization of the biopsy protocol according to the prostate gland volume for prostate cancer detection J Urol 173 1536 1540 10.1097/01.ju.0000154242.60413.3d 15821481 (Pubitemid 40524767)
5. MJ O'Connell CS Smith PE Fitzpatrick, et al. 2004 et Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate gland: value of 12 vs. 6 cores Abdom Imag 29 132 136 10.1007/s00261-003-0089-8
6. M Inahara H Suzuki S Kojima, et al. 2006 Improved prostate cancer detection using systematic 14-core biopsy for large prostate glands with normal digital rectal examination findings Urology 68 815 819 10.1016/j.urology.2006. 05.010 17070359 (Pubitemid 44633386)
7. GN Ubhayakar WY Li CM Corbishley, et al. 2002 Improving glandular coverage during prostate biopsy using a long-core needle: technical performance of an end-cutting needle BJU Int 89 40 43 1:STN:280:DC%2BD387hvVeisg%3D%3D 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02531.x 11849158
8. HS Dogan SY Eskicorapci D Ertoy-Baydar, et al. 2005 Can we obtain better specimens with an end-cutting prostatic biopsy device? Eur Urol 47 297 301 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.09.004 15716189 (Pubitemid 40248846)
9. L Häggarth P Ekman L Egevad 2002 A new core-biopsy instrument with an end-cut technique provides prostate biopsies with increased tissue yield BJU Int 90 51 55 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02809.x 12081770 (Pubitemid 34785799)
10. E Ozden C Göǧüş O Tulunay S Baltaci 2004 The long core needle with an end-cut technique for prostate biopsy: does it really have advantages compared with standard needles? Eur Urol 45 287 291 10.1016/j.eururo.2003.10.004 15036672 (Pubitemid 38221400)
11. F Brimo RT Vollmer J Corcos, et al. 2008 Prognostic value of various morphometric measurements of tumour extent in prostate needle core tissue Histopathology 53 177 183 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1crkvVWkug%3D%3D 10.1111/j.1365-2559. 2008.03087.x 18752501 (Pubitemid 352032774)
12. TJ Sebo BJ Bock JC Cheville C Lohse P Wollan H Zincke 2000 The percent of cores positive for cancer in prostate needle biopsy specimens is strongly predictive of tumor stage and volume at radical prostatectomy J Urol 163 174 178 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c%2Fmslyhuw%3D%3D 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67998-0 10604340
13. L Cheng TD Jones CX Pan, et al. 2005 Anatomic distribution and pathologic characterization of small-volume prostate cancer (<0.5 ml) in whole-mount prostatectomy specimens Mod Pathol 18 1022 1026 10.1038/modpathol.3800431 15861213 (Pubitemid 41224491)
14. RA Moore 1935 The morphology of small prostatic carcinomas J Urol 33 224 234
15. Y Goto M Ohori A Arakawa, et al. 1996 Distinguishing clinically important from unimportant prostate cancers before treatment: value of systematic biopsies J Urol 156 1059 1063 1:STN:280:DyaK28zitV2lug%3D%3D 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65702-1 8709307
16. AM Wise TA Stamey JE McNeal, et al. 2002 Morphologic and clinical significance of multifocal prostate cancers in radical prostatectomy specimens Urology 60 264 269 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01728-4 12137824 (Pubitemid 34831770)
17. MW Kattan SF Shariat B Andrews, et al. 2003 The addition of interleukin-6 soluble receptor and transforming growth factor beta1 improves a preoperative nomogram for predicting biochemical progression in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 21 3573 3579 1:CAS:528: DC%2BD2cXptlCktbs%3D 10.1200/JCO.2003.12.037 12913106 (Pubitemid 46594048)
18. M Graefen PI Karakiewicz I Cagiannos, et al. 2002 International validation of a preoperative nomogram for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy J Clin Oncol 20 3206 3212 10.1200/JCO.2002.12.019 12149292 (Pubitemid 34831516)
19. RA Gardiner FC Hamdy 2008 Management of low-risk prostate cancer World J Urol 26 411 414 10.1007/s00345-008-0329-1 18807047
20. JI Epstein PC Walsh M Carmichael, et al. 1994 Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer JAMA 271 368 374 1:STN:280:DyaK2c7htFalsA%3D%3D 10.1001/jama.271.5.368 7506797 (Pubitemid 24037911)
21. AV D'Amico R Whittington SB Malkowicz, et al. 2000 Clinical utility of the percentage of positive prostate biopsies in defining biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 18 1164 1172 10715284 (Pubitemid 30159832)
22. SJ Freedland MK Terris GS Csathy, et al. 2004 Preoperative model for predicting prostate specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy using percent of biopsy tissue with cancer, biopsy Gleason grade and serum prostate specific antigen J Urol 171 2215 2220 10.1097/01.ju.0000124463.13319.0a 15126788 (Pubitemid 38625437)
23. JI Epstein WC Allsbrook MB Amin LL Egevad the ISUP Grading Committee 2005 The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma Am J Surg Pathol 29 1228 1242 10.1097/01.pas.0000173646.99337.b1 16096414 (Pubitemid 41232997)
24. Fajardo DA, Epstein JI (2009) Fragmentation of prostatic needle biopsy cores containing adenocarcinoma: the role of specimen submission. BJU Int. Epub ahead of print 2009. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08737.x
25. C Gupta JZ Ren KJ Wojno 2004 Individual submission and embedding of prostate biopsies decreases rates of equivocal pathology reports Urology 63 83 86 10.1016/j.urology.2003.09.016 14751354 (Pubitemid 38147555)