SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY OF PROSTATIC BIOPSY RESULT BASED ON PROSTATE VOLUME

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published 2014-07-02
Joko Pitoyo Ferry Safriadi

Abstract

Objective: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of both types of prostate biopsies, between 6 core biopsy/sextant biopsy with volume based biopsy prostate. Material & method: The subjects were patients that have been performed prostate biopsy in Hasan Sadikin Hospital in 2006 – 2010. The data was divided into two groups, the group A (before 2009) 327 patients had performed 6 cores biopsy, group B (after 2009), the biopsy was performed based on prostate volume (volume < 40 cc : 8 cores, volume 40-60 cc : 10 coresand volume > 60 cc : 12 cores). Biopsy results confirmed by definitive results from surgery, then analyzed specificity and sensitivity between two groups. The analytical statistic test using unpaired T test and Levene’s test. Results: There were 654 patients divided in two groups. The data in both groups were similar based on analytical statistic test using unpaired t test (p = 0.28) and the data was in normal distribution (Levene’s test = p > 0.05). The group A, mean age 67.4 years, mean prostate volume 32.53 cc and mean PSA levels 29.89 ng/dl and at group B, mean age 66.7 years, mean prostate volume 30.89 cc and mean PSA levels 16.92 ng/dl. Volume based cores method in prostate biopsy have higher sensitivity and specificity compared with 6 core biopsy (97.5% vs 94.0%) and (92.2% vs 77.8%). Conclusion: The sensitivity and specificity of prostate biopsy was increased in volume based cores compared to 6 cores biopsy. Keywords: Prostate biopsy, volume based.


##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

References

Boyle P, Ferlay J. Cancer incidence and mortality in Europe 2004. Ann Oncol. 2005 Mar; 16(3): 481-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15718248

Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008 Mar; 58(2): 71-96. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18287387

Geovanne F. Souza, A.A.C. Findings of repeated transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Brazilian Journal of Urology; 2001. p. 37-41.

Roslind I. McCoy Sibley, A.F.S. Correlation of digital rectal examination, prostate specific antigen, and transrectal ultrasound in prostate carcinoma in African Americans. Journal of The National Medical Association; 2008.

Eriz Özden, A.T.T., Çağatay Göğüş, Cemil Yağcı, Sadettin Küpeli. Diagnostic value of transrectal ultrasonography in patients with PSA values > 20 ng/ml. Journal of Ankara University Faculty of Medicine. 2007; 60(4): 164-6.

International Agency for Research on Cancer. Downloaded from www.globocan.com. August 5, 2011.

Indonesian Society of Urologic Oncology (ISUO) meeting; 2011. Unpublished data.

Heidenreich M. Bolla, S Joniau TH, Van der Kwast V Matveev, Mason N. Mottet, H-P Schmid T, Wiegel F. Zattoni. Guidelines of prostate cancer. European Association of Urology; 2010. p. 13-15.

Fransesco Cantiello, Vittorio Imperatore, Mariateresa Iannuzzo. Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) alone vs PNB combined with an anaesthetic-myorelaxant agent cream for prostate biopsy: A prospective, randomized double arm study. BJUI; 2008. p. 1195-9.

John R. Ramey, Ethan J. Halpern, Leonard G. Gomella. Ultrasonography and biopsy of the prostate. Campbell-Walsh. Urology; 2007.

Section
Articles
Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University