Comparison of 12, 14 And 16 Core Prostate Biopsies in Detecting Prostate Cancer in Patients: A Comparative Study: Comparison of 12, 14 and 16 Core Prostate Biopsies

Suleyman  Sagır; Muslum  Ergun

doi:10.54393/pbmj.v6i09.912

Authors

Suleyman Sagır Department of Urology, Mardin Artuklu University, Artuklu/Mardin, Turkey
Muslum Ergun Department of Urology, Istanbul Atlas University, Istanbul, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54393/pbmj.v6i09.912

Keywords:

Cancer, Prostate Glands, Prostate Biopsy, PCA Levels

Abstract

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men and early detection is vital for effective treatment. The traditional method for diagnosis includes the use of prostate biopsies, where a needle is used to extract tissue samples from the prostate gland to be analyzed for cancerous cells. Objective: To evaluate and compare the diagnosis rates of benign, malign, and intermediate conditions in patients subjected to 12-core, 14-core, and 16-core biopsy techniques. Methods: The retrospective study was conducted on patients who visited our clinic and underwent prostate biopsy between the years 2013 and 2021. This study revolved around a careful comparative examination of the diagnostic outcomes from three different prostate biopsy techniques – 12-core, 14-core, and 16-core biopsy. Reults: The findings indicated that there were no notable variations in age or PSA levels among the groups. The 12-core group showed 44.8% benign, 17.8% malign, and 37.4% borderline cases. The 14-core group revealed 43.1% benign, 31.4% malign, and 25.5% borderline cases. The 16-core group had 32% benign, 42.7% malign, and 25.2% borderline cases (p<0.001). Conclusions: The 16-core biopsy yielded the highest malignancy detection.

References

Nazir B. Pain during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and the role of periprostatic nerve block: what radiologists should know. Korean Journal of Radiology. 2014 Oct; 15(5): 543-53. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2014.15.5.543. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2014.15.5.543

Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparen P, Norlen BJ, Busch C. The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology. 1997 Oct; 50(4): 562-6. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00306-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00306-3

Ploussard G, Nicolaiew N, Marchand C, Terry S, Vacherot F, Vordos D, et al. Prospective evaluation of an extended 21-core biopsy scheme as initial prostate cancer diagnostic strategy. European Urology. 2014 Jan; 65(1): 154-61. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.049

Guichard G, Larré S, Gallina A, Lazar A, Faucon H, Chemama S, et al. Extended 21-sample needle biopsy protocol for diagnosis of prostate cancer in 1000 consecutive patients. European Urology. 2007 Aug; 52(2): 430-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.02.062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2007.02.062

Bjurlin MA, Carter HB, Schellhammer P, Cookson MS, Gomella LG, Troyer D, et al. Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing. The Journal of Urology. 2013 Jun; 189(6): 2039-46. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.072

Rodríguez-Covarrubias F, González-Ramírez A, Aguilar-Davidov B, Castillejos-Molina R, Sotomayor M, Feria-Bernal G. Extended sampling at first biopsy improves cancer detection rate: results of a prospective, randomized trial comparing 12 versus 18-core prostate biopsy. The Journal of Urology. 2011 Jun; 185(6): 2132-6. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.010

Philip J, Ragavan N, Desouza J, Foster CS, Javle P. Effect of peripheral biopsies in maximising early prostate cancer detection in 8‐, 10‐or 12‐core biopsy regimens. BJU International. 2004 Jun; 93(9): 1218-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04857.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04857.x

Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. The Journal of Urology. 1989 Jul; 142(1): 71-4. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)38664-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)38664-0

Eichler K, Hempel S, Wilby J, Myers L, Bachmann LM, Kleijnen J. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review. The Journal of Urology. 2006 May; 175(5): 1605-12. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00957-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00957-2

Berger AP, Gozzi C, Steiner H, Frauscher F, Varkarakis J, Rogatsch H, et al. Complication rate of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a comparison among 3 protocols with 6, 10 and 15 cores. The Journal of Urology. 2004 Apr; 171(4): 1478-81. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000116449.01186.f7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000116449.01186.f7

Jones JS, Patel A, Schoenfield L, Rabets JC, Zippe CD, Magi-Galluzzi C. Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy. The Journal of Urology. 2006 Feb; 175(2): 485-8. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00211-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00211-9

Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, Baccala AA, Kruecker J, Benjamin CJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. The Journal of Urology. 2011 Oct; 186(4): 1281-5. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.078

Yacoub JH, Verma S, Moulton JS, Eggener S, Oto A. Imaging-guided prostate biopsy: conventional and emerging techniques. Radiographics. 2012 May; 32(3): 819-37. doi: 10.1148/rg.323115053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.323115053

Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, Thompson IM, D'Amico AV, Volk RJ, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2010 Mar; 60(2): 70-98. doi: 10.3322/caac.20066. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20066

Hong CW, Amalou H, Xu S, Turkbey B, Yan P, Kruecker J, et al. Prostate biopsy for the interventional radiologist. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 2014 May; 25(5): 675-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.12.568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2013.12.568

Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Etzioni R, Freedland SJ, Greene KL, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. The Journal of Urology. 2013 Aug; 190(2): 419-26. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.119

Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, Schaeffer E, Schiavina R, Taneja S, et al. Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. European Urology. 2017 Mar; 71(3): 353-65. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.004

Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, Simpfendörfer T, Boxler S, Alammar K, et al. Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. The Journal of Urology. 2013 Oct; 190(4): 1380-6. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043

Li YH, Elshafei A, Li J, Gong M, Susan L, Fareed K, et al. Transrectal saturation technique may improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy in men with prostate-specific antigen< 10 ng/ml. European Urology. 2014 Jun; 65(6): 1178-83. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.047

Wang BR, Chen CC, Zheng RH, Hu JC, Ou YC. Comparison of cancer detection between 18-and 12-core prostate biopsy in Asian patients with prostate-specific antigen levels of 4–20 ng/mL. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association. 2018 Dec; 81(12): 1044-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jcma.2018.06.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcma.2018.06.003