Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 16402723

[Consensus-based guidelines on prostate biopsy].

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines, helping physicians to take decisions about diagnostic procedures for men wishing to undergo examination for detection of prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A panel of multidisciplinary Italian experts in urology, medical oncology, laboratory medicine, radiotherapy, pathology and methodologists for clinical trial (Mario Negri Institution) grouped together in 2002 to address specific questions relating to clinical controversies in prostate cancer diagnosis. A practitioners feedback survey by means of a questionnaire of 49 items was also conducted in 2003 to assess the great variability in all the aspects relating a prostate biopsy (PB). Experts reviewed relevant evidence, using CeVEAS scale, of the literature from 1966 to December 2004 (Medline, Embase, Cochrane library) before offering the discussion panel proposed guidelines for a given subset of questions. The discussion panel, which consisted of presenters and representatives from medical oncology, forensic medicine, radiotherapy, ethics, biochemistry and family practice medicine, took place on February 12, 2005 in Bologna. The panel deliberated to reach consensus on suggested guidelines. When evidence was insufficient, suggested guidelines represent the opinion of a cross-section of the presenters and discussion panel. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved regarding all the aspects relating PB. The final paper was approved by the jury, the panel of experts and the audience. A standardized guideline, containing a short version for physicians and a standardized patient information booklet, for nation-wide use was developed. In the final document it has been reported as following: Prostatic biopsy (PB) is recommended in all patients with a PSA> = 4.0 ng/ml (2,5 ng/ml in patients with positive family history), abnormal DRE and %FPSA < 10%. PSAD and PSAV are considered controversial predictive factors. Antibiotic prophylaxis with a fluoroquinolone, which can be omitted in cases of transperineal (TP) PB, is mandatory when using a transrectal (TR) approach. It is necessary to start the prophylaxis the day before and continued for 2-3 days after the procedure. Anaesthesia is mandatory in case of TP biopsy and strongly recommended in cases of TR PB (10 cc of periprostatic lidocaine injection rather than intrarectal lidocaine gel). The optimal PB scheme should include more than 6 cores (preferably 10-12 cores) weighted more laterally and apically. PB directed only to the hypoechoic lesion or standard sextant biopsy (Hodge's scheme) are considered obsolete. PB of the transition zone are mandatory only in cases of re-biopsy. A tru-cut needle with a diameter of 18 Fr. is recommended and a sandwich technique for core fixation informalin is considered the optimal approach. A PB should be repeated within 6-12 months in the following cases:1) First biopsy is inadequate (less than 6 cores, absence of prostatic cells on the cores), 2) in presence of HGPIN, ASAP or both on first PB, 3) in cases with persistently high levels of PSA (PSA > 10 ng/ml or PSA velocity > 0,75 ng/ml/year). PB after radiotherapy is not routinely indicated as well as biopsy of the vesico-urethral anastomosis after radical prostatectomy in patients with PSA failure. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested guidelines represent a reasonable diagnostic approach in patients to be submitted to PB, with the understanding that new data, subsequent findings, or other methodological considerations may lead to future modifications.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Italian Panel on Prostate Biopsy. 2005. [Consensus-based guidelines on prostate biopsy].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16402723/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evaluation of persistent pulmonary infiltrates in pediatric oncology patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), computed-tomography-guided biopsy (CTB), and open lung biopsy (OLB) in the management of persistent pulmonary infiltrates in pediatric oncology patients. METHODS: Retrospective review of clinical records of pediatric oncology patients who underwent BAL, CTB, and OLB over a 7-year period. Data was compared across the three procedures using chi-square analysis. Logistic regression was used to adjust potential confounding variables for diagnostic yield. RESULTS: There were 113 consecutive patients who underwent 140 separate procedures during their hospitalization. Thirty (26%) patients had a previous BMT. BALs were more likely to occur as the first line of investigation (98% vs. 47%, 45%; P < 0.01) and in patients with diffuse infiltrates (64% vs. 6%, 26%; P < 0.01) when compared to CTB and OLB, respectively. OLBs were performed less frequently in neutropenic patients (26% vs. 53%, 54%; P < 0.05), more often led to change in management directly because of procedure (61% vs. 12%, 33%; P < 0.01), and had higher diagnostic yield (61% vs. 24%, 36%; P < 0.01) when compared to CTB and BAL, respectively. Diagnostic yield of OLB was significantly higher regardless of diffuse or focal nature of infiltrate. Major adverse events after a procedure were not significantly different across the three procedures. Logistic regression demonstrated that having an OLB was independently associated with identifying the cause of pulmonary infiltrate. CONCLUSION: OLB appears to be safe, has the best diagnostic yield, and leads to change in management more often than CTB or BAL in pediatric oncology patients with persistent pulmonary infiltrates.

Biopsy↗

[Pathoanatomical preparation and reporting for dysplasias and cancers of the cervix uteri: cervical biopsy, conization, radical hysterectomy and exenteration].

A careful macroscopic description with selection of representative tissue for histological examination is required for quality assurance, for assessing prognostic factors and for answering legal questions in (pre)cancerous lesions of the cervix uteri. Exact and standardized gross inspection and preparation are decisive for the quality of the histopathological statement. The extent of cervical carcinomas should be given in three dimensions, including the relative depth of invasion into the cervical wall. The report should include size, type (according to the WHO classification) and grading of the tumor, the presence of lymphatic as well as blood vessel invasion and perineural involvement. The statement for resection margins should include the vaginal, parametrial, rectal and vesical directions. It is also mandatory to document the number of lymph nodes with metastatic disease in relation to the total number of nodes investigated. The staging should follow the TNM system. In the handling of conisation specimens, it is important to appropriately document localization, horizontal expansion, depth of invasion including microinvasion of any dysplastic or malignant lesions. Clockwise dissection of the conisation specimen, total submission, and step sections are recommended. The preparation of exenteration specimens is a highly skilled job: the exact tumor dimension should be given in its relation to all resected organs and structures with special focus on resection margins.

Biopsy↗