Journal of the Formosan Medical Association
Volume 108, Issue 9 , Pages 713-718, September 2009

Diagnostic Value of Finger-guided Prostate Nodule Biopsy Combined With Systemic Random Biopsy

  • I-Ni Chiang

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • ,
  • Shang-Jen Chang

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • ,
  • Yeong-Shiau Pu

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • ,
  • Kuo-How Huang

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • ,
  • Hong-Jen Yu

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • ,
  • Chao-Yuan Huang

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei Branch, Taiwan
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to: Dr Chao-Yuan Huang, Department of Urology, National Taiwan University Hospital, 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei 100, Taiwan

Received 4 December 2008; received in revised form 2 March 2009; accepted 29 May 2009.

Article Outline

Background/Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare prostate cancer detection rates and pathology results, using the Gleason grading system, of 12-core systemic random transrectal ultrasound- guided prostate biopsy (SB) and 3-core finger-guided prostate nodule biopsy (FGNB).

Methods

Between January 2002 and December 2006, 148 patients with digitally palpable prostate nodules received SB and additional FGNB. The prostate cancer detection rates and Gleason scores of positive cancer specimens were compared between SB and combination biopsy (SB + FGNB). The patients' characteristics, including age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), percentage of free PSA and prostate volume were also recorded.

Results

With simple SB, FGNB, and combination biopsy, the prostate cancer detection rates were 39.9%, 37.9%, and 44.6%, respectively. Of the 66 patients with prostate cancer, the Gleason sum was underestimated in three patients with simple SB only and in one patient with FGNB only. The false-negative rates for SB and FGNB were 10.6% and 15.2%, respectively.

Conclusion

In patients with a palpable prostate nodule, combination biopsy with systemic and nodule biopsy could avoid some misdiagnoses of prostate cancer and provide more accurate information for pathology grading.

Key Words:  biopsy , diagnostic techniques and procedures , pathology , prostate cancer

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

 

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Gomella LG , Labrie F , Gamito EJ , et al.   Prostate cancer: risk assessment and diagnostic approaches . Rev Urol . 2001;4:31–38
  2. Hodge KK , McNeal JE , Terris MK , et al.   Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate . J Urol . 1989;142:71–74
  3. Sruogis A , Jankevicius F , Mickys U . Prostatic biopsy technique. Historical review . Medicina (Kaunas) . 2005;41:957–967
  4. Guichard G , Larre S , Gallina A , et al.   Extended 21-sample needle biopsy protocol for diagnosis of prostate cancer in 1000 consecutive patients . Eur Urol . 2007;52:430–435
  5. Huynh CC , Awad N , Fulton M . The advantage of finger guided prostate biopsies in addition to transrectal ultra-sound guided prostate biopsies in patients with palpable disease . BJU Int . 2006;97:19
  6. Mancuso P , Huynh CC , Fulton M , et al.   Finger-guided prostate biopsies in combination with standard TRUS-guided biopsies offers additional information in men with an abnormal DRE over TRUS-guided biopsy alone . BJU Int . 2008;101:23
  7. Loch T , Eppelmann U , Lehmann J , et al.   Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: random sextant versus biopsies of sono-morphologically suspicious lesions . World J Urol . 2004;22:357–360
  8. Schroder FH , van der MP , Beemsterboer P , et al.   Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer . J Natl Cancer Inst . 1998;90:1817–1823
  9. Chandra RV , Heinze S , Dowling R , et al.   Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging staging of prostate cancer . ANZ J Surg . 2007;77:860–865
  10. Philip J , Dutta RS , Ballal M , et al.   Is a digital rectal examination necessary in the diagnosis and clinical staging of early prostate cancer? . BJU Int . 2005;95:969–971
  11. Chiang IN , Chang SJ , Pu YS , et al.   Major complications and associated risk factors of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a retrospective study of 1875 cases in Taiwan . J Formos Med Assoc . 2007;106:929–934
  12. Guinan P , Ray P , Bhatti R , et al.   An evaluation of five tests to diagnose prostate cancer . Prog Clin Biol Res . 1987;243:551–558
  13. Sheikh M , Sinan T , Kehinde EO , et al.   Relative contribution of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography in interpreting serum prostate-specific antigen values for screening prostate cancer in Arab men . Ann Saudi Med . 2007;27:73–78
  14. Roobol MJ , Zappa M , Maattanen L , et al.   The value of different screening tests in predicting prostate biopsy outcome in screening for prostate cancer data from a multicenter study (ERSPC) . Prostate . 2007;67:439–446
  15. Marshall JB . How adequate is digital rectal exam for prostate cancer screening at colonoscopy? Can adequacy be improved? . Dig Dis Sci . 2008;53:719–722
  16. Woo HH , Rosario DJ , Chapple CR . Digitally-guided prostatic biopsies—the Sheffield biopsy guide . Br J Urol . 1996;77:152
  17. Van Every MJ , Rooney B . Comparison of ultrasound-guided and digitally directed transrectal biopsy of palpable prostate lesions . Urology . 1993;42:677–679
  18. Türkeri L , Tarcan T , Biren T , et al.   Transrectal ultrasonography versus digitally guided prostate biopsies in patients with palpable lesions on digital rectal examination . Br J Urol . 1995;76:184–186
  19. Lan SK , Tsai YS , Lin YH , et al.   Diagnostic performance of a random versus lesion-directed biopsy of the prostate from transrectal ultrasound: results of a 5-year consecutive clinical study in 1 institution in South Taiwan . J Ultrasound Med . 2007;26:11–17
  20. Borden LS , Wright JL , Kim J , et al.   An abnormal digital rectal examination is an independent predictor of Gleason > or = 7 prostate cancer in men undergoing initial prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 790 men . BJU Int . 2007;99:559–563

PII: S0929-6646(09)60394-6

doi:10.1016/S0929-6646(09)60394-6

Journal of the Formosan Medical Association
Volume 108, Issue 9 , Pages 713-718, September 2009

Article Tools