Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Repeat Prostate Biopsy Practice Patterns in a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative.
Burks, Frank N; Hu, Jonathan C; Telang, Dinesh; Liu, Alice; Hawken, Scott; Montgomery, Zack; Linsell, Susan; Montie, James E; Miller, David C; Ghani, Khurshid R.
Afiliação
  • Burks FN; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: fburks@urologist.org.
  • Hu JC; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Telang D; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Liu A; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Hawken S; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Montgomery Z; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Linsell S; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Montie JE; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Miller DC; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Ghani KR; Department of Urology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Royal Oak, Michigan; Department of Urology, University of Michigan (AL, SH, ZM, SL, JEM, DCM, KRG), Ann Arbor, Michigan.
J Urol ; 198(2): 322-328, 2017 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28257783
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

We examined rebiopsies in MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative) to understand adherence to guidelines recommending repeat prostate biopsy in patients with multifocal high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical small acinar proliferation. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

We analyzed data on men undergoing repeat biopsy, practice patterns and cancer detection rates. Multivariate regression modeling was used to calculate the proportion of patients undergoing rebiopsy. We used claims data to validate the treatment classification in MUSIC. To understand reasons for not performing rebiopsy we reviewed records of a sample of patients with atypical small acinar proliferation.

RESULTS:

We identified 5,375 men with a negative biopsy, of whom 411 (7.6%) underwent repeat biopsy. In 718 men with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, 350 with atypical small acinar proliferation and 587 with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation or atypical small acinar proliferation alone at initial biopsy the rebiopsy rate was 20.7%, 42.5% and 55.6%, respectively. The adjusted proportion of patients with rebiopsy in each practice ranged from 0% to 17.2% (p <0.001). The overall cancer detection rate at rebiopsy was 39.3%. It was highest after atypical small acinar proliferation (adjusted probability 0.39, 95% CI 0.30-0.48), and after high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation (adjusted probability 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.65). The greatest Gleason 7 or greatest detection rate of 41.1% was found in patients with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation. Chart review revealed that 45.5% of patients with atypical small acinar proliferation underwent prostate specific antigen testing instead of rebiopsy while 36% failed to undergo rebiopsy despite a recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS:

Rebiopsy rates vary in Michigan practices with relatively low use in men with high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and atypical small acinar proliferation or atypical small acinar proliferation alone. Quality improvement strategies should target patients with atypical small acinar proliferation and high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia as they have the highest likelihood of cancer detection.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Padrões de Prática Médica / Neoplasia Prostática Intraepitelial / Fidelidade a Diretrizes / Melhoria de Qualidade / Células Acinares Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Padrões de Prática Médica / Neoplasia Prostática Intraepitelial / Fidelidade a Diretrizes / Melhoria de Qualidade / Células Acinares Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article