Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy

  • Chapter
Image-Guided Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer

  • 111 Accesses

Abstract

Prostate cancer is a significant health care problem for American men. It continues to be the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in American men and the second leading cause of cancer deaths (1). In 2002, the American Cancer Society estimated over 189,000 new cases of prostate cancer (2). Based on the yearly incidence of new prostate cancer cases in the United States, it was estimated that more than a half-million transrectal ultrasound —guided prostate biopsies were performed in 2001.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Greenlee R, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo P. Cancer Statistics, 2000. CA Cancer J Clin 2000;50:7–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A, Thomas A, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer Statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2002;52:23–47.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wild J, Reid J. Echographic tissue diagnosis. Fourth Annual Conference on Ultrasound Therapy, Philadelphia, PA; 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Watanabe H, Kaiho H, Tanaka M. Diagnostic application of ultrasonography of the prostate. Invest Urol 1971;8:548.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J. Urol. 1989;142:71–74; discussion 74–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Klein EA, Zippe CD. Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy defining a new standard. J Urol 2000;163:179–180.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Torp-Pedersen ST, Lee F. Transrectal biopsy of the prostate guided by transrectal ultrasound. Urol Clin North Am 1989;16:703–712.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Torp-Pedersen S, Lee F, Littrup PJ, et al. Transrectal biopsy of the prostate guided with transrectal US: longitudinal and multiplanar scanning. Radiology 1989;170:23–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Keetch D, Catalona W, Smith D. Serial prostatic biopsies in men with persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. J Urol 1994;151:1571–1574.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Stamey T. Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 1995;45:2–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 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;157:199–202; discussion 202–203.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Karakiewicz P, Aprikian A, Meshref A, Bazinet M. Computer-assisted comparative analysis of four-sector and six-sector biopsies of the prostate. Urology 1996;48:747–750.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Presti J, Chang J, Bhargava V, Shinohara K. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 2000;163:163–167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparen P, Norlen BJ, Busch C. The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 1997;50:562–566.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Beurton D, Barthelemy Y, Fontaine E. Twelve systematic prostate biopsies are superior to sextant biopsies for diagnosing carcinoma: a prospective randomized study. Br J Urol 1997;80:239–245.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cornud F, Hamida K, Flam T. Endorectal color Doppler sonography and endorectal MR imaging features of nonpalpable prostate cancer: Correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Am JRoentgenol 2000;175:1161–1168.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cho J, Kim S, Lee S. Peripheral hypoechoic lesions of the prostate: evaluation with color and power Doppler ultrasound. Eur Urol 2000;37:443–448.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Franco OE, Arima K, Yanagawa M, Kawamura J. The usefulness of power Doppler ultrasonography for diagnosing prostate cancer: histological correlation of each biopsy site. Br J Urol Int 2000;85:1049–1052.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. 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;167:1648–1652.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Halpern E, Verkh L, Forsberg F. Initial experience with contrast-enhanced sonography of the prostate. Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1575–1580.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Feleppa E, Fair W, Liu T. Three-dimensional ultrasound analyses of the prostate. Mol Urol 2000;4:133–139; discussion 141.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Campani R, Bottinelli O, Calliada F. Three-dimensional imaging II (in process citation). Eur J Radiol 1998;27(suppl 2):S183.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tong S, Downey D, Cardinal H. A three-dimensional ultrasound prostate imaging system. Ultrasound Med Biol 1996;22:735.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McNeal J. Regional morphology and pathology of the prostate. Am J Clin Pathol 1968;49:347.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. McNeal J. Anatomy of the prostate: an historical survey of divergent views. Prostate 1980;1:3–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. McNeal J. Normal and pathologic anatomy of prostate. Urology 1981;17:11–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. McNeal J. Normal histology of the prostate. Am J Surg Pathol 1988;12:619–633.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. McNeal J. Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma: correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 1988;12: 897.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Coley C, Barry M, Fleming C. Should Medicare provide reimbursement for prostatespecific antigen testing for early detection of prostate cancer? Part II: early detection strategies. Urology 1995;46:125–141.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Grossfeld G, Carroll P. Prostate cancer early detection: a clinical perspective. Epidemiol Rev 2001;23:173–180.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Carter H, Pearson J. PSA velocity for the diagnosis of early prostate cancer: a new concept. Urol Clin North Am 1993;20:665–670.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Davidson D, Bostwick D, Qian J, et al. Prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma: predictive accuracy in needle biopsies. J Urol 1995;154:1295–1299.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Bemer A, Danielsen H, Pettersen E, Fossa S, Reith A, Nesland J. DNA distribution in the prostate. Normal gland, benign and pre-malignant lesions and subsequent adenocarcinomas. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1993;15:247–252.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Park S, Shinohara K, Grossfeld G, Carroll P. Prostate cancer detection in men with prior high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical prostate biopsy. J Urol 2001;165:1409–1414.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Benson M, Whang I, Pantuck A. Prostate specific antigen density: a means of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. J Urol 1992;147: 815–816.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Shandera K, Thibault G, Deshon G. J. (1998) Variability in patient preparation for prostate bionsv among american urologists. Urology 1998:52:644–646.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Carey J, Korman H. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications? .J Urol 2001:166: 82–85.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Lindert KA, Kabalin JN, Terris MK. Bacteremia bacteriuria after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2000;164:76–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Terris M, Stamey T. Determination of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound. J Urol 1987;145:984.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lee F, Torp-Pedersen S, Siders D, Littrup P, McLeary R. Transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis staging of prostate carcinoma. Radiology 1989;170:609–615.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Rifkin M. Normal sonographic anatomy, in Ultrasound of the Prostate. Raven Press, New York, 1998; pp. 51–93.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lee F, Gray J, McLeary R. Transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: location, echogenicity, histopathology, staging. Prostate 1985;7:117–129.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Shinohara K, Wheeler T, Scardino P. The appearance of prostate cancer on transrectal ultrasonography: correlation of imaging pathological examinations. J Urol 1989;142: 76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Lee F, Gray J, McLeary R. Prostatic evaluation by transrectal sonography: criteria for diagnosis of early carcinoma. Radiology 1986;158:91–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Brawer M. Chetner M. Ultrasonography of the prostate biopsy, in Campbell’s Urology (Walsh P, Retik A, Vaughan EJ, Wein A, eds.), W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1998; pp. 2506–2518.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ellis WJ, Brawer MK. The significance of isoechoic prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 1994;152:2304–2307.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Carter H, Hamper U, Sheth S. Evaluation of transrectal ultrasound in the early detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1989;142:1008–1010.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Shinohara K, Scardino P, Carter S, Wheeler T. Pathologic basis of the sonographic appearance of the normal malignant prostate. Urol Clin North Am 1989;16:675–691.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Halpern E. Strup S. Using gray-scale color power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:623.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Ornstein D. Kang J. How to improve prostate biopsy detection of prostate cancer. Curr. Urol Rep 2001;2:218–223.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Shigeno K, Igawa M, Shiina H, Wada H, Yoneda T. The role of colour Doppler ultrasonography in detecting prostate cancer. BJU Int 2000;86:229–233.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Downey D. Fenster A. Three-dimensional power Doppler detection of prostatic cancer. Am J Roentgenol 1985;165:741.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Okihara K, Kojima M, Nakanouchi T. Transrectal power Doppler imagin in the detection of prostate cancer. Br J Urol Int 2000;85:1053–1057.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Ismail M, Gomella LG Ultrasound for prostate imaging biopsy. Curr. Opin. Urol. 2001;11: 471–477.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Unal D, Sedelaar J, Aarnik R. Three dimensional contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography conventional examination methods: the value of diagnostic predictors of prostate cancer. Br J Urol Int. 2000;86:58–64.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Cosgrove D, Kiely P, Williamson R. Ultrasonographic contrast media in the urinary tract. Br J Urol In. 2000;86(suppl):11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Cooner W, Mosley B, Rutherford C. Prostate cancer detection in a clinical urological practice by ultrasonography, digital rectal exam prostate specific antigen. J Urol 1990;143:1146.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Rodriguez L. Terris M. Risks compications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 1998;160:2115.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Rietbergen JB, Kruger AE, Kranse R, Schroder FH. Complications of transrectal ultra- sound-guided systematic sextant biopsies of the prostate: wvaluation of complication rates risk factors within a population-based screening program. Urology 1997;49:875–880.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Aus G, Ahlgren G, Bergdahl S. Infection after transrectal core biopsies of the prostate: risk factors antibiotic prophylaxis. Br J Urol 1996;77: 851.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Desmond P, Clark J, Thompson I. Morbidity with contemporary prostate biopsy. J Urol 1993;150:1425.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Norberg M, Holmberg L, Haggman M, Magnusson A. Determinants of complications after multiple transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. Eur Radiol 1996;6:457–461.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Rodriguez LV, Terris MK. Risks complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study review of the literature. J Urol 1998;160: 2115–2120.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Aus G, Hermansson CG, Hugosson J, Pedersen KV. Transrectal ultrasound examination of the prostate: Complications acceptance by patients. Br J Urol 1993;71:457–459.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Collins GN, Lloyd SN, Hehir M, McKelvie G. B. Multiple transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies true morbidity patient acceptance. Br J Urol 1993;71: 460–463.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Rani J, Fournier F, Bon D, Gremmo E, Dore B, Aubert J. Patient tolerance of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Br J Urol 1997;79: 608–610.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Naughton CK, Ornstein DK, Smith DS, Catalona WJ. Pain morbidity of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial of 6 versus 12 cores. J Urol 2000;163:168–171.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Chang SS, Alberts G, Wells N, Smith JA Jr, Cookson MS. Intrarectal lidocaine during transrectal prostate biopsy: Results of a prospective double-blind randomized trial. J Urol 2001.166:2178–2180.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Alavi AS, Soloway MS, Vaidya A, Lynne CM, Gheiler EL. Local anesthesia for ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: A prospective randomized trial comparing 2 methods. J Urol 2001;166:1343–1345.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Clements R, Aideyan OU, Griffiths GJ, Peeling WB. Side effects patient acceptability of transrectal biopsy of the prostate. Clin Radiol 1993;47:125–126.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Soloway M. S. Obek C. Periprostatic local anesthesia before ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2000;163:172–173.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Desgrandchamps F, Meria P, Irani J, Desgrippes A, Teillac P, Le Duc A. The rectal administration of lidocaine gel tolerance of transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy of the prostate: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled study. Br J Urol Int 1999X: 1007–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Wu CL, Carter HB, Naqibuddin M, Fleisher LA. Effect of local anesthetics on patient recovery after transrectal biopsy. Urology 2001;57:925–929.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Nash PA, Bruce JE, Indudhara R, Shinohara K.Transrectal ultrasound guided prostatic nerve blockade eases systematic needle biopsy of the prostate. J. Urol. 1996;155: 607–609.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Issa M, Bux S, Chun T, et al. A randomized prospective trial of intrarectal lidocaine for pain control during transrectal prostate biopsy: the Emory University experience. J Urol 2000;164:397–399.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Lee F, Littrup P, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of transrectal US DRE for screening. Radiology 1998;168:389–394.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate. J Urol 1989;142:66–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Wilson T. Guthman D. Current status of transrectal ultrasonography in the detection of prostate cancer. Oncology 1991;5:73–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Borboroglu PG, Comer SW, Riffenburgh RH, Amling CL. Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies. J Urol 2000;163:158–162.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Chen, ME, Troncoso P, Johnston D, Tang K, Babaian R. Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis. J Urol 1997;158:2168–2175.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Egevad L, Frimmel H, Norberg M, et al. Three-dimensional computer reconstruction of prostate cancer from radical prostatectomy specimens: evaluation of the model by core biopsy simulation. Urology 1999;53:192–198.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Loughlin M, Carlbom I, Busch C. Three-dimensional modeling of biopsy protocols for localized prostate cancer. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1998;22:229–238.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Ravery V, Goldblatt L, Royer B, et al. Extensive biopsy protocol improves the detection rate of prostate cancer. J Urol 2000;164:393–396.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Chang JJ, Shinohara K, Hovey RM, Montgomery C, Presti JC Jr. Prospective evaluation of systematic sextant transition zone biopsies in large prostates for cancer detection. Urology 1998;52:89–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, et al. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2001;165:1554–1559.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Levine MA, Ittman M, Melamed J, Lepor H. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1998:159:471–475; discussion 475–476.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Naughton CK, Miller DC, Mager DE, Ornstein DK, Catalona WJ. A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J Urol 2000;164:388–392.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. A comparative analysis of sextant an extended 11core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000;163:152–157.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Ravery V, Billebaud T, Toublanc M, et al. Diagnostic value of ten systematic TRUSguided prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 1999;35:298–303.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Chen M, Troncoso P, Tang K. Comparison of prostate biopsy schemes by computer simulation. Urology 1999;53:951.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Epstein J, Chan D, Sokoll L. Nonpalpable stage T lc prostate cancer: prediction of insignificant disease using free/total prostate specific antigen levels needle biopsy findings. J Urol 1998;160:2407.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Eskew L, Woodruff R, Bare R. Prostate cancer diagnosed by the 5 region biopsy method is significant disease. J Urol 1998;160:794.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Carter H, Savageot J, Walsh P, Epstein J. Prospective evaluation of men with stage T1c adenocarcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997;157:2206.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Chan T, Chan D, Lecksell K, Stutzman R, Epstein J. Does increased needle biopsy sampling of the prostate detect a higher number of potentially insignificant tumors? J Urol 2001;166:2181–2184.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Ellis W. J. Brawer M. K. Repeat prostate needle biopsy: who needs it? J Urol 1995;153:1496–1498.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. 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;163:1144–1148; discussion 1148–1149.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM. Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 2001;166:86–91; discussion 91–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Fleshner NE, O’Sullivan M, Fair W. R. Prevalence predictors of a positive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided needle biopsy of the prostate. J Urol 1997;158:505–508; discussion 508–509.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Epstein J, Walsh P, Sauvageot J. Use of repeat sextant transition zone biopsies for assessing extent of prostate cancer. J Urol 1997;158:1886.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Lui PD, Terris MK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Indications for ultrasound guided transition zone biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1995:153:1000–1003

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Fleshner NE, Fair WR. Indications for transition zone biopsy in the detection of prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 1997;157:556–558.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Keetch D. Catalona W. Prostatic transition zone biopsies in men with previous negative biopsies persistently elevated serum prostate specific antigen values. J Urol 1995;154:1795–1797.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Bazinet M, Karakiewicz P, Aprikian A, et al. Value of systematic transition zone biopsies in the early detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1996;155:605–606.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Rovner ES, Schanne FJ, Malkowicz SB, Wein AJ. Transurethral biopsy of the prostate for persistently elevated or increasing prostate specific antigen following multiple negative transrectal biopsies. J Urol 1997;158:138–141; discussion 141–142.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Niesel T, Breul J, Hartung R. Diagnostic value of additional systematic prostate biopsies in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate. Urology 1997;49:869–874.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Terris MK, Pham TQ, Issa MM, Kabalin JN. Routine transition zone seminal vesicle biopsies in all patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies are not indicated. J Urol 1997;157:204–206.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Uzzo RG, Wei JT, Waldbaum RS, et al. The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology 1995;46:831–836.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Epstein J, Walsh P, Akingba G, Carter H. The significance of prior benign needle biopsies in men subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer. J Urol 1999;162:1649–1652.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Letran JL, Meyer GE, Loberiza FR, Brawer MK. The effect of prostate volume on the yield of needle biopsy. J Urol 1998;160:1718–1721.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Vashi A, Wojno K, Gillespie B, Oesterling J. A model for the number of cores per prostate biopsy based on patient age prostate gland volume. J Urol 1998;159:920–924.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Polascik T, Oesterling J, Partin A. Prostate specific antigen: a decade of discovery what we have learned where we are going. J Urol 1999;162:293–306.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Oesterling J, Jacobsen S, Chute C. Serum prostate-specific antigen in a community-based population of healthy men: establishment of age-specific reference ranges. JAMA 1993:270:860–864.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Morgan T, Jacobsen S, McCarthy W. Age-specific reference ranges for prostate-specific antigen in black men. N Engl J Med 1996;335:304–310.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Oesterling J, Kumamoto Y, Tsukamoto T. Serum prostate-specific antigen in a community-based population of healthy Japanese men: lower values than for similarly aged white men. Br J Urol 1995;75:347–353.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Pareek G, Armenakas NA, Fracchia JA. Periprostatic nerve blockade for transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study. J Urol 2001;166:894–897.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Tracy M. Downs MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gary D. Grossfeld MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katsuto Shinohara MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter R. Carroll MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Anthony V. D’Amico MD, PhD  & Jay R. Harris MD  & 

  2. Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Jay S. Loeffler MD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Humana Press Inc. Totowa, NJ

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Downs, T.M., Grossfeld, G.D., Shinohara, K., Carroll, P.R. (2003). Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy. In: D’Amico, A.V., Loeffler, J.S., Harris, J.R. (eds) Image-Guided Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-422-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-422-1_1

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-61737-368-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-422-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation