Abstract
Transrectal prostate biopsy (PB) is the standard procedure for diagnosing prostate cancer. Up to 1989 it was done with digital image guidance or transperineally (usually under general anesthesia). These techniques were replaced by transrectal sextant biopsy, which was introduced by Hodge, and has since been the standard procedure [11]. It is routinely performed with ultrasound guidance. However, experience in the past few years has shown that the six biopsy specimens taken on initial biopsy according to that protocol are not sufficient for detecting all clinically relevant cancers (>0.5 cm3). This is why altered sampling schemes have been described (Table 5.1). Basically, the trend is to take as many samples during initial biopsy as needed for detecting cancer with a high probability and to keep the repeat biopsy rate low. The eight-core scheme recommended by Presti is currently considered to be most useful [20]. The pattern proposed by Karakiewicz, to take one core for every 5 cm3 prostate volume, is an alternative [13].
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al (2000) A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 163:152-157
Bostwick DG. (1997) Evaluating prostate needle biopsy: therapeutic and prognostic importance. CA Cancer J Clin 47:297-319
Bostwick DG, Qian J, Frankel K (1995) The incidence of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsies. J Urol 154:1791–1794
Brat DJ, Wills ML, Lecksell KL, et al (1999) How often are diagnostic features missed with less extensive histologic sampling of prostate needle biopsy specimens? Am J Surg Pathol 23:257–262
Cheville JC, Reznicek MJ, Bostwich DG. (1997) The focus of “atypical glands, suspicious for malignancy” in prostatic needle biopsy specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 108:633-640
Davidson D, Bostwick DG, Qian J, et al (1996) Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma: predictive accuracy in needle biopsies. J Urol 154:1295–1299
Djavan B, Zlotta A, Remzi M, et al (2000) Optimal predictors of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy: a prospective study of 1051 men. J Urol 1144–1149
Eastham JA, May R, Robertson JL, et al (1999) Development of a nomogram that predicts the probability of a positive biopsy in men with an abnormal digital rectal examination and a prostate-specific antigen between o and 4 ng/ml. Urology 54:709-713
Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullogh DL. (1997) Systematic 5-region biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 157:199-203
Henson DE, Hutter R.V.P, Farrow G (1994) Practice protocol for the examination of specimens removed from patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland. A publication of the cancer committee, College of American Pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med 118:779–783
Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK. (1989) Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 142:66–70
Karakiewicz PI, Bazinet M, Aprikian AG. (1997) Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 49:55–59
Karakiewicz PI, Hanley JA, Bazinet M (1998) Three-dimensional computer assisted analysis of sector biopsy of the prostate. Urology 52:208-212
Karakiewicz PI, Aprikian AG. (1998) Prostate cancer. V. Diagnostic tools for early detection. CMAJ 159:1139–1146
Linzer DG, Stock RG, Stone NN, et al (1996) Seminal vesical biopsy: accuracy and implications for staging of prostate cancer. Urology 48:757–761
Manivel CJ. (1997) Inconclusive results of needle biopsies of the prostate gland. What they mean and what to do [editorial]. Am J Clin Pathol 108:611–615
McNeal JE. (1967) Regional morphology and pathology of the prostate. Am J Clin Pathol 49: 347–357
Naughton CK, Miller DC, Mager DE, et al (2000) A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J Urol 164:388–392
Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, et al (1997) The sextant protocol for ultrasound guided biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 50:562–566
Presti JC, Chang JJ, Bhargava V, Shinohara K (2000) Optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 163: 163–167
Rabbani F, Stroumbakis N, Kava BR, et al (1998) Incidence and clinical significance of false-negative sextant prostate biopsies. J Urol 159:1247–1250
Ravery V, Goldblatt L, Royre B, et al (2000) Extensive biopsy protocol improves the detection rate of prostate cancer. J Urol 164:393–396
Raviv G, Zlotta AR, Janssen TH, et al (1996) Do prostate specific antigen and prostate specific antigen density enhance the detection of prostate carcinoma after initial diagnosis of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia without concurrent carcinoma? Cancer 77:2103–2108
Reyes AO, Humphrey PA. (1998) Diagnostic effect of complete histologic sampling of prostate needle biopsiy specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 109:416–422
Stroumbakis N, Cookson MS, Reuter VE, et al (1997) Clinical significance of repeat sextant biopsies in prostate cancer patients. Urology 49 [Suppl 3A]:113–n8
Terris MK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. (1992) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsies. J Urol 148:829–832
Terris MK, Pham TQ, Issa MM, et al (1997) Routine transition zone and seminal vesical biopsies in all patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies are not indicated. J Urol 157:204–206
Uzzo RG, Wie JT. (1995) The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology 46:831–836
Vashi AR, Wojno KJ, Gillespie B, et al (1998) A model for the number of cores per prostate biopsy based on patient age and prostate gland volume. J Urol 159:920–924
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Höltl, W. (2003). Prostate Biopsy — When, How, and When to Repeat?. In: Hofmann, R., Heidenreich, A., Moul, J.W. (eds) Prostate Cancer. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56321-8_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56321-8_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-62643-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-56321-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive