Prostate cancer detection in men with prostate specific antigen 4 to 10 ng/ml using a combined approach of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted and systematic biopsy

被引:91
作者
Pelzer, A
Bektic, J
Berger, AP
Pallwein, L
Halpern, EJ
Horninger, W
Bartsch, G
Frauscher, F
机构
[1] Univ Innsbruck, Dept Urol, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
[2] Univ Innsbruck, Dept Radiol, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria
[3] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Jefferson Prostate Diagnost Ctr, Dept Radiol, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
关键词
prostate; prostatic neoplasms; prostate-specific antigen; biopsy; ultrasonography; Doppler; color;
D O I
10.1097/01.ju.0000158444.56199.03
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: Transrectal gray scale ultrasound guided biopsy is the standard method for diagnosing prostate cancer (PC). Improved cancer detection with ultrasound contrast agents is related to better detection of tumor vascularity. We evaluated the impact of a combined approach of contrast enhanced, color Doppler targeted biopsy (CECD) and systematic biopsy (SB) for the PC detection rate in men with prostate specific antigen (PSA) 4.0 to 10 ng/ml. Materials and Methods: We examined 380 screening volunteers with a total PSA of 4.0 to 10 ng/ml (percent free PSA less than 18). CECD was always performed before SB. Another investigator blinded to contrast enhanced findings performed 10 SBs. The cancer detection rate for the CECD, SB and combined approaches was assessed. Results: PC was detected in 143 of 380 patients (37.6%, mean total PSA 6.2 ng/ml). The PC detection rate for CECD and for SB was 27.4% and 27.6%, respectively. The overall cancer detection rate with the 2 methods combined was 37.6%. For targeted biopsy cores the detection rate was significantly better than for SB cores (32.6% vs 17.9%, p < 0.01). CECD in a patient with cancer was 3.1-fold more likely to detect PC than SB. Conclusions: CECD allows for the detection of lesions that cannot be found on gray scale ultrasound or SB. CECD allows for assessment of neovascularity associated with PC. However, the combined use of CECD and SB allows for maximal detection of PC with a detection rate of 37.6% in our patients with PSA 4 to 10 ng/ml.
引用
收藏
页码:1926 / 1929
页数:4
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   Microbubble echo-enhancers: A new direction for ultrasound? [J].
Blomley, M ;
Cosgrove, D .
LANCET, 1997, 349 (9069) :1855-1856
[2]   Contrast-enhanced three-dimensional power Doppler angiography of the human prostate: Correlation with biopsy outcome [J].
Bogers, HA ;
Sedelaar, JPM ;
Beerlage, HP ;
de la Rosette, JJMCH ;
Debruyne, FMJ ;
Wijkstra, H ;
Aarnink, RG .
UROLOGY, 1999, 54 (01) :97-104
[3]   The role of color Doppler and staging biopsies in prostate cancer detection [J].
Bree, RL .
UROLOGY, 1997, 49 (3A) :31-34
[4]   Prospective evaluation of lateral biopsies of the peripheral zone for prostate cancer detection [J].
Chang, JJ ;
Shinohara, K ;
Bhargava, V ;
Presti, JC .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1998, 160 (06) :2111-2114
[5]   Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis [J].
Chen, ME ;
Troncoso, P ;
Johnston, DA ;
Tang, K ;
Babaian, RJ .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 158 (06) :2168-2175
[6]  
Cosgrove D, 1996, CLIN RADIOL, V51, P44
[7]   Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate [J].
Eskew, LA ;
Bare, RL ;
McCullough, DL .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 157 (01) :199-202
[8]   Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy with conventional systematic biopsy: Impact on prostate cancer detection [J].
Frauscher, F ;
Klauser, A ;
Volgger, H ;
Halpern, EJ ;
Pallwein, L ;
Steiner, H ;
Schuster, A ;
Horninger, W ;
Rogatsch, H ;
Bartsch, G .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 167 (04) :1648-1652
[9]   Using gray-scale and color and power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer [J].
Halpern, EJ ;
Strup, SE .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2000, 174 (03) :623-627
[10]   RANDOM SYSTEMATIC VERSUS DIRECTED ULTRASOUND GUIDED TRANS-RECTAL CORE BIOPSIES OF THE PROSTATE [J].
HODGE, KK ;
MCNEAL, JE ;
TERRIS, MK ;
STAMEY, TA .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1989, 142 (01) :71-75