Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Paper
  • Published:

Impact of training level of urology residents on the detection of prostate cancer on TRUS biopsy

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 7, pages 38–40 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the performance of urology residents at each training level in detecting prostate cancer with transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy. The inclusion criteria were: (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 4–10 ng/ml; and (2) 10–12 cores per biopsy session. Data from repeat biopsy sessions were excluded. Overall prostate cancer detection rate for 170 patients was 39.4%. PSA, digital rectal examination (DRE), and prostate volume were predictors of cancer detection. There were no significant differences in overall cancer detection rates, PSA, DRE, or prostate volume between resident levels. In conclusion, urology residents at all levels of training perform equally well at detecting cancer using TRUS prostate biopsy technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2003 (http://www.cancer.org).

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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gerstenbluth RE et al. Does level of expertise influence the cancer detection rate of prostate biopsy? J Urol 2002; 167: 1323 (abstract).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ellis WJ, Chetner MP, Preston SD, Brawer MK . Diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma: the yield of serum prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography. J Urol 1994; 152: 1520–1525.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gerstenbluth RE et al. The accuracy of the increased prostate specific antigen level (greater than or equal to 20 ng/ml) in predicting prostate cancer: is biopsy always required? J Urol 2002; 168: 1990–1993.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Uzzo RG et al. The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology 1995; 46: 831–836.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Karakiewicz PI et al. Outcome of sextant biopsy according to gland volume. Urology 1997; 49: 55–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Basillote JB, Armenakas NA, Hochberg DA, Fracchia JA . Influence of prostate volume in the detection of prostate cancer. Urology 2003; 61: 167–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Roobol MJ, Kranse R, van der Cruijsen IW, Schroder FH . A more advanced clinical stage is positively correlated with an increased prostate cancer detection rate. Urology 2002; 59: 91–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Taylor III JA, Gancarczyk KJ, Fant GV, Mcleod DG . Increasing the number of core samples taken at prostate needle biopsy enhances the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Urology 2002; 60: 841–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Babaian RJ et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000; 163: 152–157.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 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.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. O'Dowd GJ, Miller MC, Orozco R, Veltri RW . Analysis of repeated biopsy results within 1 year after a noncancer diagnosis. Urology 2000; 55: 553–559.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mian BM et al. Predictors of cancer in repeat extended multisite prostate biopsy in men with previous negative extended multisite biopsy. Urology 2002; 60: 836–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Porter CR et al. Predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy in a racially diverse population: a prospective study. Urology 2002; 60: 831–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Orozco R et al. Observations on pathology trends in 62,537 prostate biopsies obtained from urology private practices in the United States. Urology 1998; 51: 186–195.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Roehl KA, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ . Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. J Urol 2002; 167: 2435–2439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wise AM, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Clayton JL . Morphologic and clinical significance of multifocal prostate cancers in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2002; 60: 264–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Flanigan RC et al. Accuracy of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography in localizing prostate cancer. J Urol 1994; 152: 1506–1509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. J A Karam and M J Shulman: These authors contributed equally to this study

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

    J A Karam, M J Shulman & E A Benaim

  2. North Texas Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Dallas, Texas, USA

    J A Karam & E A Benaim

Authors
  1. J A Karam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M J Shulman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E A Benaim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E A Benaim.

Additional information

Source of funding: none.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karam, J., Shulman, M. & Benaim, E. Impact of training level of urology residents on the detection of prostate cancer on TRUS biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 7, 38–40 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500695

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500695

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links