The Diagnostic Significance of Abnormal Findings on Transrectal Ultrasonography in Patients with Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels Equal or Less than 4.0ng/ml.
10.4111/kju.2006.47.7.752
- Author:
Sang Wook LEE
1
;
Seok Soo BYUN
;
Sang Eun LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ssbyun@snubh.org
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Biopsy;
Diagnosis;
Prostatic neoplasm;
Prostate-specific antigen;
Ultrasonography
- MeSH:
Biopsy;
Diagnosis;
Digital Rectal Examination;
Humans;
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms;
Male;
Prostate;
Prostate-Specific Antigen*;
Prostatic Neoplasms;
Ultrasonography*
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2006;47(7):752-756
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We evaluated the diagnostic significance of abnormal findings on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in men with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels of 4.0ng/ml or less, presented with lower urinary tract symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 201 men with PSA levels of 4.0ng/ml or less underwent prostate biopsy with 12 cores. The indications for a biopsy were an elevated PSA of 3.0ng/ml or more, abnormality on digital rectal examination (DRE) and/or focal lesion on TRUS. Cancer detection rates according to TRUS and DRE findings, stratified by PSA level were investigated. Especially, the detection rates in patients who underwent prostate biopsies due to only abnormal findings on TRUS (only TRUS group) were addressed. RESULTS: Of the 201 patients, 45 patients (22.4%) were diagnosed as having prostate cancer. The detection rate was 4.8% (1/21), 4.8% (1/21), 38.1% (8/21), and 25.4% (35/138) in patients with PSA levels of less than 1.0ng/ ml, 1.0 to 1.9ng/ml, 2.0 to 2.9ng/ml, and 3.0 to 4.0ng/ml, respectively. As for only TRUS group, the detection rate was 7.7% (2/26), 38.5% (5/13) and 21.7% (5/23) in patients with PSA levels of less than 2.0ng/ml, 2.0 to 2.9ng/ml, and 3.0 to 4.0ng/ml, respectively. For the patients with no abnormal findings on TRUS and DRE, and a PSA of 3.0 to 4.0ng/ml, the detection rate was 26.4% (24/91), and not significantly different from that of only TRUS group with a PSA of 3.0 to 4.0ng/ml. CONCLUSIONS: It seems that prostate biopsy should be undertaken in patients with abnormal TRUS findings and PSA levels of 2.0 to 3.0ng/ml, and in all patients with PSA levels of 3.0 to 4.0ng/ml, irrespective of TRUS findings. In patients with abnormal TRUS findings and PSA levels of less than 2.0ng/ml, follow-up of PSA is recommended rather than performing immediate prostate biopsy.
