Home  About us  Contact
 

Prostate Needle Biopsy (prostate + needle_biopsy)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Primary seminoma of the prostate

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Issue 12 2009
Takeshi Hashimoto
Abstract A 54-year-old gentleman was suspected of having sarcoma of the prostate because of his low serum prostate-specific antigen level (1.9 ng/mL) and an enlarged heterogeneous mass on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging scans. Pathological examination of the prostate needle biopsy indicated seminoma, which was confirmed with immunohistochemical staining. There was no evidence of disease in other areas on physical examination or on radiographic tests. Therefore, we diagnosed the case as a primary seminoma of the prostate, which was consequently treated with a total of three courses of bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin chemotherapy. Complete response was obtained on computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and prostate needle re-biopsy. To our knowledge, there have only been five cases of primary seminoma of the prostate reported. [source]

Simplified treatment of massive rectal bleeding following prostate needle biopsy

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, Issue 7 2004
MURAT GONEN
Abstract Rectal bleeding is frequently seen in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, but it usually stops spontaneously. We report a case of life-threatening rectal bleeding following this procedure. Bleeding was controlled using an ordinary condom, which was successfully inflated in the rectum over the bleeding site. [source]

Measuring men's opinions of prostate needle biopsy

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 8 2005
Jessica C. C. Medd
Background: Needle biopsy of the prostate is an important, common, invasive procedure. Little is known about men's perceptions of it. The present study was designed to assess men's experience of prostate biopsy, to determine the feasibility of a randomized trial of interventions to alleviate distress during prostate biopsy, and to develop a pragmatic outcome measure for such a trial. Methods: Of 33 consecutive men undergoing prostate biopsy at a Sydney (Australia), tertiary referral urology centre 31 men were selected for study. A cross-sectional, observational was performed. Participants completed both a 24-item questionnaire assessing relevant symptoms, attitudes and emotional responses and a semistructured interview shortly after their prostate biopsy. Each item of the questionnaire was rated on an 11-point scale from 0 (no trouble at all), to 10 (worst they could imagine). Results: The mean score for discomfort was 4.4 with 32% scoring ,7; the mean score for pain was 4.2 with 29% scoring ,7. The other most troubling aspects were: ,waiting for the result' (mean 4.4, 32% ,7) and ,fear of the result' (mean 3.7, 32% ,7). Seventy-one per cent of subjects stated that they would have been willing to participate in a randomized trial of interventions to make prostate biopsies less unpleasant. Thirteen of the 24 items were retained and refined for use as an outcome measure for subsequent trials. Conclusions: Many men experience pain, discomfort and anxiety during prostate needle biopsy and most would be willing to participate in trials of interventions to make it less unpleasant. [source]

Contrast-enhanced colour Doppler-targeted vs a 10-core systematic repeat biopsy strategy in patients with previous high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

BJU INTERNATIONAL, Issue 12 2010
Michael Mitterberger
Study Type , Diagnosis (case series) Level of Evidence 4 OBJECTIVE To compare the results of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler (CECD)-targeted prostate biopsy with a systematic 10-core grey-scale biopsy scheme in patients initially diagnosed with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN), as although HGPIN is thought to be a precursor to invasive adenocarcinoma, its diagnosis is no longer considered an indication for repeat prostate biopsy and patients should be followed by prostate-specific antigen levels and a digital rectal examination. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 104 patients (aged 45,78 years) diagnosed with HGPIN on initial prostate needle biopsy were referred for a repeat biopsy within 6 months. Two independent examiners evaluated each patient; one used CECD-targeted biopsy (up to five cores) into hypervascular regions in the peripheral zone only, and subsequently the second took a systematic 10-core grey-scale biopsy. Cancer detection rates of both techniques were compared. RESULTS Overall, 26 of the 104 men (25%) had prostate cancer in the repeated biopsy. Using the CECD technique cancer was detected in 21% (22 of 104). The positive re-biopsy rate using the systematic technique was 9.6% (10 of 104; P < 0.001). The total incidence of HGPIN with no evidence of tumour on re-biopsy was 8.7% (nine of 104). The Gleason score in all 22 cancers detected with the CECD technique varied between 6 and 8. The systematic technique detected cancers with Gleason scores of 6 or 7. There were no adverse events or complications. CONCLUSION CECD increased the detection rate of prostate cancer, and using fewer biopsy cores than the systematic biopsy technique in patients previously diagnosed with HGPIN. [source]