Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Application of Prostate Ultrasound for Prostate Biopsy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prostate Ultrasound

  • 1490 Accesses

Abstract

The evaluation of prostatic conditions prior to the advent of sonographic techniques relied on palpation of the gland and imprecise sampling techniques. With the development gray-scale ultrasound, the transrectal approach to imaging the prostate gland has become the standard of care for diagnostic evaluation of prostatic conditions, prostate biopsy, and therapeutic approaches to prostate cancer. This chapter focuses on the application of transrectal ultrasound imaging to perform prostate biopsy as well as the indications and various techniques utilized. Additional topics covered include prophylactic antibiotics, local analgesia, and an extended core technique, demonstrating ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy as safe and effective in the detection of prostate cancer and providing important prognostic information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ferguson R. Prostatic neoplasms; their diagnosis by needle puncture and aspiration. Am J Surg. 1930;9:507.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Astraldi A. Diagnosis of cancer of the prostate; biopsy by rectal route. Urol Cutaneous Rev. 1937;41:421.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wild J. Fourth annual conference in ultrasound therapy. Presented at the, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wantanabe H, Kato H, Kato T. Diagnostic application of ultrasonotomography to the prostate. Nippon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 1968;59:273.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Crawford ED, Haynes Jr AL, Story MW, et al. Prevention of urinary tract infection and sepsis following transrectal prostatic biopsy. J Urol. 1982;127:449.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Berger AP, Gozzi C, Steiner H, et al. Complication rate of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a comparison among 3 protocols with 6, 10 and 15 cores. J Urol. 2004;171:1478.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cannon Jr GM, Smaldone MC, Paterson DL. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gram-negative sepsis following prostate biopsy: implications for use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis. Can J Urol. 2007;14:3653.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ozden E, Bostanci Y, Yakupoglu KY, et al. Incidence of Acute Prostatitis Caused by Extended-Spectrum beta-Lactamase-producing Escherichia coli After Transrectal Prostate Biopsy. Urology. 2009;74:119–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Taylor AK, Zembower TR, Nadler RB, Scheetz MH, Cashy JP, Bowen D, Murphy AB, Dielubanza E, Schaeffer AJ. Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab cultures in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and cost of care. J Urol. 2012;187(4):1275–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lindert KA, Kabalin JN, Terris MK. Bacteremia and bacteriuria after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2000;164:76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shakil J, Piracha N, Prasad N, Kopacz J, Tarasuk A, Farrell R, Urban C, Mariano N, Wang G, Segal-Maurer S. Use of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy prophylaxis in the setting of community-associated multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli rectal colonization. Urology. 2014;83(4):710–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dajani AS, Taubert KA, Wilson W, et al. Prevention of bacterial endocarditis: recommendations by the American Heart Association. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;25:1448.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nishimura RA, Carabello BA, Faxon DP, et al. ACC/AHA 2008 guideline update on valvular heart disease: focused update on infective endocarditis: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2008;118:887.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bratzler DW, Houck PM. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1706.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. De Sio M, D’Armiento M, Di Lorenzo G, et al. The need to reduce patient discomfort during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: what do we know? BJU Int. 2005;96:977.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Soloway MS. Do unto others–why I would want anesthesia for my prostate biopsy. Urology. 2003;62:973.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nijs HG, Essink-Bot ML, DeKoning HJ, et al. Why do men refuse or attend population-based screening for prostate cancer? J Public Health Med. 2000;22:312.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li R, Ruckle HC, Creech JD, Culpepper DJ, Lightfoot MA, Alsyouf M, Nicolay L, Jellison F, Baldwin DD. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Assessing Diazepam to Reduce Perception and Recall of Pain During Transrectal Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy of the Prostate. J Endourol. 2014;28(7):881–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nash PA, Bruce JE, Indudhara R, et al. Transrectal ultrasound guided prostatic nerve blockade eases systematic needle biopsy of the prostate. J Urol. 1996;155:607.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schostak M, Christoph F, Muller M, et al. Optimizing local anesthesia during 10-core biopsy of the prostate. Urology. 2002;60:253.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Trucchi A, De Nunzio C, Mariani S, et al. Local anesthesia reduces pain associated with transrectal prostatic biopsy. A prospective randomized study. Urol Int. 2005;74:209.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hergan L, Kashefi C, Parsons JK. Local anesthetic reduces pain associated with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a meta-analysis. Urology. 2007;69:520.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bozlu M, Atici S, Ulusoy E, et al. Periprostatic lidocaine infiltration and/or synthetic opioid (meperidine or tramadol) administration have no analgesic benefit during prostate biopsy. A prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study comparing different methods. Urol Int. 2004;72:308.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vanni AP, Schaal CH, Costa RP, et al. Is the periprostatic anesthetic blockade advantageous in ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy? Int Braz J Urol. 2004;30:114.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Walsh K, O’Brien T, Salemmi A, et al. A randomised trial of periprostatic local anaesthetic for transrectal biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2003;6:242.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Adamakis I, Mitropoulos D, Haritopoulos K, et al. Pain during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy: a randomized prospective trial comparing periprostatic infiltration with lidocaine with the intrarectal instillation of lidocaine-prilocain cream. World J Urol. 2004;22:281.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Obek C, Ozkan B, Tunc B, et al. Comparison of 3 different methods of anesthesia before transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial. J Urol. 2004;172:502.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rabets JC, Jones JS, Patel AR, et al. Bupivacaine provides rapid, effective periprostatic anesthesia for transrectal prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2004;93:1216.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nambirajan T, Woolsey S, Mahendra V, et al. Efficacy and safety peri-prostatic local anesthetic injection in trans-rectal biopsy of the prostrate: a prospective randomized study. Surgeon. 2004;2:221.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Djavan B, Zlotta A, Remzi M, et al. Optimal predictors of prostate cancer on repeat prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 1,051 men. J Urol. 2000;163:1144.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gregg DC, Sty JR. Sonographic diagnosis of enlarged prostatic utricle. J Ultrasound Med. 1989;8:51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. McDermott V, Orr JD, Wild SR. Duplicated mullerian duct remnants associated with unilateral renal agenesis. Abdom Imaging. 1993;18:193.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. King BF, Hattery RR, Lieber MM, et al. Congenital cystic disease of the seminal vesicle. Radiology. 1991;178:207.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zagoria RJ. Genitourinary Radiology. In: Thrall JH, editor. The Requisites. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Mosby; 2004. p. 335–8.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Frauscher F, Klauser A, Volgger H, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy with conventional systematic biopsy: impact on prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 2002;167:1648.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shinohara K, Scardino PT, Carter SS, et al. Pathologic basis of the sonographic appearance of the normal and malignant prostate. Urol Clin North Am. 1989;16:675.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Terris MK, Macy M, Freiha FS. Transrectal ultrasound appearance of prostatic granulomas secondary to bacillus Calmette-Guerin instillation. J Urol. 1997;158:126.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Purohit RS, Shinohara K, Meng MV, et al. Imaging clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am. 2003;30:279.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Varghese SL, Grossfeld GD. The prostatic gland: malignancies other than adenocarcinomas. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38:179.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramey JR, H. EJ, Gomella LG. Ultrasonography and Biopsy of the Prostate. In: Wein AJ, editor. Campbell-Walsh Urology. Ninthth ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2007. p. 2883–95. vol. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bigler SA, Deering RE, Brawer MK. Comparison of microscopic vascularity in benign and malignant prostate tissue. Hum Pathol. 1993;24:220.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cornud F, Hamida K, Flam T, et al. Endorectal color Doppler sonography and endorectal MR imaging features of nonpalpable prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:1161.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Halpern EJ, Strup SE. Using gray-scale and color and power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:623.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Arger PH, Malkowicz SB, VanArsdalen KN, et al. Color and power Doppler sonography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: comparison between vascular density and total vascularity. J Ultrasound Med. 2004;23:623.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Okihara K, Kojima M, Nakanouchi T, et al. Transrectal power Doppler imaging in the detection of prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2000;85:1053.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kelly IM, Lees WR, Rickards D. Prostate cancer and the role of color Doppler US. Radiology. 1993;189:153.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Halpern EJ, Frauscher F, Strup SE, et al. Prostate: high-frequency Doppler US imaging for cancer detection. Radiology. 2002;225:71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Levine MA, Ittman M, Melamed J, et al. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol. 1998;159:471.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol. 1997;157:199.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol. 2000;163:152.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Presti Jr JC, Chang JJ, Bhargava V, et al. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol. 2000;163:163.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Naughton CK, Miller DC, Mager DE, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J Urol. 2000;164:388.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Terris MK, Pham TQ, Issa MM, et al. Routine transition zone and seminal vesicle biopsies in all patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies are not indicated. J Urol. 1997;157:204.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Sauvageot J, et al. Use of repeat sextant and transition zone biopsies for assessing extent of prostate cancer. J Urol. 1997;158:1886.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mazal PR, Haitel A, Windischberger C, et al. Spatial distribution of prostate cancers undetected on initial needle biopsies. Eur Urol. 2001;39:662.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Chang JJ, Shinohara K, Hovey RM, et al. Prospective evaluation of systematic sextant transition zone biopsies in large prostates for cancer detection. Urology. 1998;52:89.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Katsuto Shinohara VM, Chi T, Carroll P. Prostate Needle Biopsy Techniques and Interpretation. In: Voegelzang NJ, Debruyne FMJ, Shipley WU, Linehan WM, editors. Genitourinary Oncology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 2006. p. 111–9.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Djavan B, Remzi M, Marberger M. When to biopsy and when to stop biopsying. Urol Clin North Am. 2003;30:253.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Keetch DW, Catalona WJ, Smith DS. Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. J Urol. 1994;151:1571.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, et al. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol. 2001;166:1679.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Slawin KM, et al. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease: a prospective multicenter clinical trial. JAMA. 1998;279:1542.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wang R, Chinnaiyan AM, Dunn RL, et al. Rational approach to implementation of prostate cancer antigen 3 into clinical care. Cancer. 2009;115:3879–86.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Haese A, de la Taille A, van Poppel H, et al. Clinical utility of the PCA3 urine assay in European men scheduled for repeat biopsy. Eur Urol. 2008;54:1081.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Bott SR, Henderson A, McLarty E, et al. A brachytherapy template approach to standardize saturation prostatic biopsy. BJU Int. 2004;93:629.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Lane BR, Zippe CD, Abouassaly R, et al. Saturation technique does not decrease cancer detection during follow up after initial prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2008;179:1746.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Borboroglu PG, Comer SW, Riffenburgh RH, et al. Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies. J Urol. 2000;163:158.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol. 2001;166:86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Fleshner N, Klotz L. Role of “saturation biopsy” in the detection of prostate cancer among difficult diagnostic cases. Urology. 2002;60:93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Gershman B, Zietman AL, Feldman AS, McDougal WS. Transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy for patients with persistently elevated PSA and multiple prior negative biopsies. Urol Oncol. 2013;31(7):1093–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Shapiro RH, Johnstone P. Risk of Gleason Grade Inaccuracies in Prostate Cancer Patients Eligible for Active Surveillance. Urology. 2012;80:661–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Taira AV, Merrick GS, Bennett A, Andreini H, Taubenslag W, Galbreath RW, Butler WM, Bittner N, Adamovich E. Transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy as a staging procedure to select patients best suited for active surveillance. Am J Clin Oncol. 2013;36(2):116–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Katz DJ, Pinochet R, Richards KA, Godoy G, Udo K, Nogueria L, Cronin AM, Fine SW, Scardino PT, Coleman JA. Comparison of transperineal mapping biopsy results with whole-mount radical prostatectomy pathology in patients with localized prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer. 2014;2014:781438.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Moran BJ, et al. Re-biopsy of the Prostate With Stereotactic Transperineal Technique. J Urol. 2006;176:1376–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Egawa S, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. The sonographic appearance of irradiated prostate cancer. Br J Urol. 1991;68:172.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Whittington R, Broderick GA, Arger P, et al. The effect of androgen deprivation on the early changes in prostate volume following transperineal ultrasound guided interstitial therapy for localized carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;44:1107.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Kapoor DA, Wasserman NF, Zhang G, et al. Value of transrectal ultrasound in identifying local disease after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 1993;41:594.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Goldenberg SL, Carter M, Dashefsky S, et al. Sonographic characteristics of the urethrovesical anastomosis in the early post-radical prostatectomy patient. J Urol. 1992;147:1307.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Rodriguez LV, Terris MK. Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature. J Urol. 1998;160:2115.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Maatman TJ, Bigham D, Stirling B. Simplified management of post-prostate biopsy rectal bleeding. Urology. 2002;60:508.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Brullet E, Guevara MC, Campo R, et al. Massive rectal bleeding following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Endoscopy. 2000;32:792.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Raaijmakers R, Kirkels WJ, Roobol MJ, et al. Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program. Urology. 2002;60:826.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Thompson PM, Pryor JP, Williams JP, et al. The problem of infection after prostatic biopsy: the case for the transperineal approach. Br J Urol. 1982;54:736.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Desmond PM, Clark J, Thompson IM, et al. Morbidity with contemporary prostate biopsy. J Urol. 1993;150:1425.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Moul JW, Bauer JJ, Srivastava S, et al. Perineal seeding of prostate cancer as the only evidence of clinical recurrence 14 years after needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy: molecular correlation. Urology. 1998;51:158.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Moul JW, Miles BJ, Skoog SJ, et al. Risk factors for perineal seeding of prostate cancer after needle biopsy. J Urol. 1989;142:86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Bastacky SS, Walsh PC, Epstein JI. Needle biopsy associated tumor tracking of adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J Urol. 1991;145:1003.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Koppie TM, Grady BP, Shinohara K. Rectal wall recurrence of prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol. 2002;168:2120.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Hara N, Kasahara T, Kawasaki T, et al. Frequency of PSA-mRNA-bearing cells in the peripheral blood of patients after prostate biopsy. Br J Cancer. 2001;85:557.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Meng MV, Shinohara K, Grossfeld GD. Significance of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol. 2003;21:145.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Oyasu R, Bahnson RR, Nowels K, et al. Cytological atypia in the prostate gland: frequency, distribution and possible relevance to carcinoma. J Urol. 1986;135:959.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Prange W, Erbersdobler A, Hammerer P, et al. Significance of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy specimens. Urology. 2001;57:486.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Davidson D, Bostwick DG, Qian J, et al. Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma: predictive accuracy in needle biopsies. J Urol. 1995;154:1295.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Lefkowitz GK, Sidhu GS, Torre P, et al. Is repeat prostate biopsy for high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia necessary after routine 12-core sampling? Urology. 2001;58:999.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Helpap BG, Bostwick DG, Montironi R. The significance of atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia for the development of prostate carcinoma. An update. Virchows Arch. 1995;426:425.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Helpap B, Bonkhoff H, Cockett A, et al. Relationship between atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and prostatic adenocarcinoma. Pathologica. 1997;89:288.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Iczkowski KA, Chen HM, Yang XJ, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosed after initial biopsy with atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy is similar to cancer found on initial biopsy. Urology. 2002;60:851.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Iczkowski KA, MacLennan GT, Bostwick DG. Atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy in prostate needle biopsies: clinical significance in 33 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997;21:1489.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Alsikafi NF, Brendler CB, Gerber GS, et al. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia with adjacent atypia is associated with a higher incidence of cancer on subsequent needle biopsy than high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia alone. Urology. 2001;57:296.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Park S, Shinohara K, Grossfeld GD, et al. Prostate cancer detection in men with prior high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2001;165:1409.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Javidan J, Wood DP. Clinical interpretation of the prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol. 2003;21:141.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Makhlouf AA, Krupski TL, Kunkle D, et al. The effect of sampling more cores on the predictive accuracy of pathological grade and tumour distribution in the prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2004;93:271.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Wills ML, Sauvageot J, Partin AW, et al. Ability of sextant biopsies to predict radical prostatectomy stage. Urology. 1998;51:759.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Ravery V, Boccon-Gibod LA, Dauge-Geffroy MC, et al. Systematic biopsies accurately predict extracapsular extension of prostate cancer and persistent/recurrent detectable PSA after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 1994;44:371.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Badalament RA, Miller MC, Peller PA, et al. An algorithm for predicting nonorgan confined prostate cancer using the results obtained from sextant core biopsies with prostate specific antigen level. J Urol. 1996;156:1375.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Clinical utility of percent-positive prostate biopsies in predicting biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Mol Urol. 2000;4:171.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Naya Y, Slaton JW, Troncoso P, et al. Tumor length and location of cancer on biopsy predict for side specific extraprostatic cancer extension. J Urol. 2004;171:1093.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Freedland SJ, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, et al. Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: results from SEARCH database. J Urol. 2003;169:2136.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Freedland SJ, Csathy GS, Dorey F, et al. Percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer is more predictive of biochemical failure or adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy than prostate specific antigen or Gleason score. J Urol. 2002;167:516.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Freedland SJ, Csathy GS, Dorey F, et al. Clinical utility of percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer cutpoints to risk stratify patients before radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2002;60:84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Elliott SP, Shinohara K, Logan SL, et al. Sextant prostate biopsies predict side and sextant site of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2002;168:105.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Virginia Mason, 1100 9th Ave, Mailstop C7-URO, Seattle, WA, 98101, USA

    Christopher R. Porter M.D., F.A.C.S. & Khanh N. Pham M.D.

Authors
  1. Christopher R. Porter M.D., F.A.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khanh N. Pham M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher R. Porter M.D., F.A.C.S. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Director of Clinical Research, Co-Director of Urologic Oncology, Section of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Virginia Mason, SEATTLE, Washington, USA

    Christopher R. Porter

  2. Section of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Virginia Mason, Seattle, Washington, USA

    Erika M. Wolff

Appendix: Pre-procedure Medication Review

Appendix: Pre-procedure Medication Review

Prior to surgery it is important to review all medications you are taking with your physician as some products may increase your risk of bleeding. These include prescription, over-the-counter (OTC), and herbal products. Please notify your physician if you are taking any of the following medications.* Medications are listed by their generic name, with the some common brand names in parenthesis.

Always consult your health care provider if you are unsure if you are taking a medication that may increase your bleeding risk.

Table A.1 List of medications to be avoided prior to biopsy
Full size table

aIncludes pills, liquids, teas, etc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Porter, C.R., Pham, K.N. (2015). Application of Prostate Ultrasound for Prostate Biopsy. In: Porter, C., Wolff, E. (eds) Prostate Ultrasound. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1948-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1948-2_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1947-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1948-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation