Optimization of prostate biopsy

Urologists routinely use the systematic sextant needle biopsy technique to detect prostate cancer. However, recent evidence suggests that this technique has a significant sampling error. We have developed a novel 3D computer assisted prostate biopsy simulator based upon 201 whole- mounted step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens to compare the diagnostic accuracy of various prostate needle biopsy protocols. Computerized prostate models have been developed to accurately depict the anatomy of the prostate and all individual tumor foci. We obtained 18-biopsies of each prostate model to determine the detection rates of various biopsy protocols. As a result, the 10- and 12- pattern biopsy protocols had a 99.0 percent detection rate, while the traditional sextant biopsy protocol rate was only 72.6 percent. The 5-region biopsy protocol had a 90.5 percent detection rate. the lateral sextant pattern revealed a detection rate of 95.5 percent, whereas the 4-pattern lateral biopsy protocol had a 93.5 percent detection rate. Our results suggest that all the biopsy protocols that use laterally placed biopsies based upon the five region anatomical model are superior to the routinely used sextant prostate biopsy pattern. Lateral biopsies in the mid and apical zones of the gland are the most important.

[1]  D L McCullough,et al.  Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. , 1997, The Journal of urology.

[2]  M W Kattan,et al.  Distinguishing clinically important from unimportant prostate cancers before treatment: value of systematic biopsies. , 1996, The Journal of urology.

[3]  D. Johnston,et al.  Comparison of prostate biopsy schemes by computer simulation. , 1999, Urology.

[4]  M. Terris,et al.  Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. , 1989, The Journal of urology.

[5]  W. Catalona,et al.  Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[6]  W. Ellis,et al.  Repeat prostate needle biopsy: who needs it? , 1995, The Journal of urology.

[7]  Louis R Kavoussi,et al.  Accuracy of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography in localizing prostate cancer. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[8]  G. D. Taylor,et al.  Computer simulation of the probability of detecting low volume carcinoma of the prostate with six random systematic core biopsies. , 1995, Urology.

[9]  W. Catalona,et al.  Detection of organ-confined prostate cancer is increased through prostate-specific antigen-based screening. , 1993, JAMA.

[10]  T. Stamey,et al.  Core cancer length in ultrasound-guided systematic sextant biopsies: a preoperative evaluation of prostate cancer volume. , 1995, Urology.

[11]  R. Babaian,et al.  Role of PSA and its indices in determining the need for repeat prostate biopsies. , 1997, Urology.