Use of increasing the number of biopsy cores in proportion to prostate size on prostate cancer diagnosis. (September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Morokuma, Futoshi; Sadashima, Eiji; Chikamatsu, Soutaro; Nakamura, Tomoya; Hayakawa, Yusuke; Tokuda, Noriaki
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical urology. Volume 14:Number 5(2021)
• Page Start: 361
• Page End: 368
• Publication Date: 2021-09
• Subjects: Prostate cancer -- biopsy -- transrectal ultrasonography -- transperineal -- diagnosis; Genitourinary organs -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Genitourinary organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Urology -- Periodicals; 616.6005
• DOI: 10.1177/2051415820949370
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2051-4158

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the value of changing the number of biopsy cores in proportion to the size of the prostate in patients who had initial transperineal prostate biopsies. Materials and methods: This study included 470 patients who underwent an initial transperineal prostate biopsy. The number of biopsy cores was changed according to the value of the product of the vertical and horizontal diameters of the largest horizontal section of the prostate on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Biopsies were classified into five groups: 12 cores, 14 cores, 18 cores, 20 cores, and 24 cores. Predictive factors for positive biopsy were studied with logistic regression analyses. Results: Variables that were significantly associated with positive biopsy were age, prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), prostate volume (Pvol), and number of biopsy cores in univariate analysis. Age, PSAD, and Pvol were independent predictors in multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference in the number of biopsy cores, and it was not an independent predictor. Conclusions: Changing the number of biopsy cores according to the area of the largest horizontal section of the prostate on TRUS had no significant impact in detecting prostate cancer. However, further research is required to confirm this conclusion. Level of evidence: Level 2b.