A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing the Vienna Nomogram and a Ten-Core Prostate Biopsy Protocol: Effect on Cancer Detection Rate

Leitão, Tito Palmela; Alfarelos, Joana; Rodrigues, Teresa; Silva, Ricardo Pereira e; Garcia, Rodrigo Miguel; Martinho, David; Sandul, A.; Mendonça, Tiago; Rodrigues, Sara; Lopes, Tomé

doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2016.06.003

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the prostate size, Lecuona and Heyns 4 reported that the rate of cancer detection in patients with prostate volume > 50 cc was 3% higher in the eight-core biopsy group compared to the Vienna nomogram group, which was contrary to our results. On the contrary, Leitão et al 15 investigated four subgroups according to their prostate volume and found that the CDR in samples taken with the Vienna nomogram was higher than that in samples taken with the 10-core biopsy protocol in all groups, which was comparable to our results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Another aim of the Vienna nomogram protocol is to detect small cancers in young patients with long life expectancy by taking a higher number of cores and to avoid insignificant cancer diagnosis (due to oversampling) in elderly patients by taking fewer cores. 4,14,15 Considering patients' age, the authors who first described the Vienna nomogram did not find any statistically significant difference between the methods when they modified the number of cores. 14 In the study, comparing Vienna nomogram with eight-core biopsy, CDRs in patients under 60 years of age were found to be 36.6% and 38.5%, whereas for those 70 years of age the rates were observed to be 32.6% and 46.9%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the rate of identified cancer in the Vienna nomogram group was lower than that in the eight-core biopsy group, distinctively. Leitão et al 15 compared 10-core biopsy with the Vienna nomogram method, where also no statistically significant difference between the two techniques was found. CDR was found to be quantitatively higher in the Vienna nomogram group which is in accordance with our findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various investigators compared their results with Vienna nomogram versus other models. 4,15 Among those, Lecuona and Heyns 4 randomized patients into two groups and compared the Vienna nomogram with eight-core biopsy and found that the CDRs were 35% and 38.4%, respectively. The lack of a statistically significant difference between the two groups was supported by our results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates between the Vienna nomogram and the 10-core biopsy protocol

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the Vienna nomogram and the 10-core prostate biopsy protocol regarding whether there is superiority in prostate cancer detection. Methods: Between January and December 2012, a total of 215 patients applying to our outpatient clinic with lower urinary tract symptoms were evaluated, prospectively. Patients with a prostate-specific antigen level of 2.5–10 ng/mL and/or suspicious digital rectal examination were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were determined as recent pelvic radiotherapy, lower urinary tract surgery, history of acute urinary retention, or indwelling urinary catheter. Biopsies were taken systematically with at least 10 cores considering prostate volume and patient age. According to Vienna nomogram, in patients requiring 6- or 8-core biopsies, tissue sampling was completed to 10 cores (our standard protocol), whereas in patients requiring more than 10 cores additional tissue sampling was performed. Results: After the determination of inclusion/exclusion criteria, 170 patients were enrolled in our study. The median (min–max) age, prostate-specific antigen value, and prostate volume were 65 (48–86) years, 7.6 ng/dL (2.5–10), and 55 cc (17–150), respectively. Prostate cancer was detected in 49 (28.8%) patients with transrectal ultrasound–guided prostate biopsy according to the Vienna nomogram. We found that our standard 10-core biopsy protocol would have diagnosed prostate cancer in 46 (27.1%) patients in the same study group showing no statistically significant difference (p > 0.005). Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that considering cancer detection rates no statistically significant differences were found between both methods. Further prospective research in this aspect is needed to define the ultimate prostate biopsy protocol.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%