Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Multi-core prostatic biopsy].

Authors: Carlos, Rodríguez Duarte;

[Multi-core prostatic biopsy].

Abstract

A brief revision of the history of the prostate biopsy is done, and emphasis is made in the importance of seek deeply in the diagnostic of small lesions, PIN and atypical prostate hyperplasia.A total of 221 patients, are presented. A description of the two groups of patients is made. group I with 148 patients in which the sextant type was performed, and the group II, in which our technique of 12 cores was done, using separated bottles for each core. The complete technique used is described and we used the "T" and Rank Sum Test for the statistical analysis of the results.We found a global 22.9% positive biopsies in the group I. This grew up as we took out more cores, with 25.9% with more than six cores. The global result in group II was 37.1% of positive biopsies (p = 0.03). There were 25 patients with 12 cores, and the rate of positive was 34.2%. Tumor in one core was found in eight patients and also in two to four cores, in the group of ten cores tumor was found in ten patients. No side effects were reported.We review the results, and emphasis was made in the necessity of have multiple cores biopsies of the prostate, studying them separate.Multi-core biopsy of the prostate is a very useful procedure in the diagnosis of cancer of the prostate with better specificity results, statistically significative, and without side effects.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia, Biopsy, Incidence, Prostate, Prostatic Hyperplasia, Prostatic Neoplasms, Adenocarcinoma, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Prostatitis, Specimen Handling, Diagnosis, Differential, Humans, False Negative Reactions, Aged, Ultrasonography

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!