Advertisement

Current Trends in Biopsy Techniques

  • Joseph C. PrestiJr.
Chapter
Part of the Current Clinical Urology book series (CCU)

Abstract

Optimization of prostate cancer detection techniques is crucial for both medical and economic reasons. Early detection is more likely to result in curable disease. Opponents to prostate cancer screening often cite, as one of their arguments, the inefficiency of current detection strategies. Over the past several years, refinements in prostate cancer detection have focused on modifications in prostate-specific antigen (PSA; free:total ratios, complexed levels) as well as biopsy techniques. Transperineal biopsies performed under digital guidance were the predominant method of prostate cancer detection utilized until the 1980s. When introduced in 1989, systematic sextant biopsies under transrectal ultrasound guidance revolutionized our ability to detect prostate cancer (1). The pivotal work of Hodge et al. (1) resulted in a safe and rapid means to sample the prostate better. As originally described, systematic sextant biopsies are usually performed in the parasagittal plane halfway between the lateral border and midline of the prostate on both right and left sides from the base, mid-gland, and apex (Fig. 1). Derivation of the sextant template was random yet did provide a symmetric approach to sampling the prostate.

Keywords

Prostate Biopsy Repeat Biopsy Cancer Detection Rate Biopsy Technique Sextant Biopsy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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: 71–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stamey TA. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995; 45: 2–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma: correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 1988; 12: 897–906.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG, et al. Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 1997; 49: 55–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rabbani F, Stroumbakis N, Kava BR, Cookson MS, Fair WR. Incidence and clinical significance of false-negative sextant prostate biopsies. J Urol 1998; 159: 1247–1250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparén P, Norlén BJ, Busch C. The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 1997; 50: 562–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levine MA, Ittman M, Melamed J, Lepor H. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1998; 159: 471–476.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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: 199–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Presti JC Jr, Chang JJ, Bhargava V, Shinohara K. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 2000; 163: 163–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multi-site directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000; 163: 152–157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, et al. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2001; 165: 1554–1559.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Presti JC Jr, O’Dowd G, Miller MC, Mattu R, Veltri RW. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM. Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biosies. J Urol 2001; 166: 86–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Igel TC, Knight MK, Young PR, et al. Systematic transperineal ultrasound guided template biopsy of the prostate in patients at high risk. J Urol 2001; 165: 1575–1579.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chon CH, Lai FC, McNeal JE and Presti JC Jr. Use of extended systematic sampling in patients with a prior negative prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2002; 167: 2457–2460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hong YM, Lai FC, Chon CH, McNeal JE, Presti JC Jr. Impact of prior biopsy scheme on pathologic features of cancers detected on repeat biopsies. Urol Oncol, in press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chang SS, Alberts G, Wells N, Smith JA Jr, Cookson MS. Intrarectal lidocaine during transrectal prostate biopsy: results of a prospective double-blind randomized trial. J Urol 2001; 166: 2178–2180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Desgrandchamps F, Meria P, Irani J, Desgrippes A, Teillac P, Le Duc A. The rectal administration of lidocaine gel and tolerance of transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled study. BJU Int 1999; 83: 1007–1009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leibovici D, Zisman A, Siegel YI, Sella A, Kleinmann J, Lindner A. Local anesthesia for prostate biopsy by periprostatic lidocaine injection: a double-blind placebo controlled study. J Urol 2002; 167: 563–565.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alavi AS, Soloway MS, Vaidya A, Lynne CM, Gheiler EL. Local anesthesia for ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial comparing 2 methods. J Urol 2001; 166: 1343–1345.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph C. PrestiJr.

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations