Journal Home

  ISSN 0204-8043 (print)

  ISSN 1314-2143 (online)

Past Issues

Repeat transrectal prostate biopsies in diagnosing prostate cancer

 

Ivan V. Bakardzhiev1 / Ivan D. Dechev2 / Thilo Wenig3 / Nonka G Mateva4 / Mladena M. Mladenova5
1Department of Urology, Medical University, St George University Hospital, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
2Department of Urology, Medical University, St George University Hospital, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
3University Clinic and Polyclinic of Urology, Jena, Germany
4Health Services, Economic and General Medicine, Facultyof Public Health, Medical University, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
5Department of Urology, Medical University, St George University Hospital, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Correspondence and reprint request to: Iv. Bakardzhiev, Department of Urology, Medical University, St George UniversityHospital, Plovdiv;E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; Mob.: (+359) 883 304 47015A Vassil Aprilov St, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Citation Information: Folia Medica. Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages 22–26, ISSN (Online) 1314-2143, ISSN (Print) 0204-8043, DOI: 10.2478/v10153-011-0084-8, October 2012
Publication History:
Published Online:
2012-10-27


ABSTRACT

 

Patients with negative prostate biopsy and persistent suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) can pose a serious diagnostic problem.

The AIM of our study was to determine the frequency of PCa found on repeat prostate biopsy and the factors leading to higher possibility of cancer positive histological result.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied retrospectively 113 patients (82 from University Clinic, Jena, Germany and 31 from Department of Urology, Plovdiv, Bulgaria) with initial negative biopsy for cancer who underwent repeat biopsies. The patients were examined between January 1999 and May 2010. The target group included patients with Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) level lower than 12.5 ng/ml and without suspicious finding on digital rectal examination (DRE). Different biopsy schemes were used in the initial and the following biopsies, depending on patient age and total prostate volume.

RESULTS: Overall PCa detection rate was 22.1% (25 of 113). The repeat biopsy found PCa in 15.9% (18 of 113). In patients with 3 biopsies the PCa detection rate was considerably lower - only 8.6% (3 of 35). PCa was found in only 1 patient of 18 (5.5%) who underwent four or more biopsies. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was performed in 15 patients with at least two previously negative biopsies. The pathohistological examination of the resected tissue showed PCa in 3 of the patients (20%).

CONCLUSION: The interval between biopsies is not a significant predictive factor for positive prostate biopsy. The chance for detecting PCa after the second negative transrectal biopsy procedure is low. Therefore, TURP can be used as an alternative procedure to harvest adequate tissue material for pathologic examination, especially in patients with obstructive voiding symptoms.