Literature DB >> 15644780

Closest distance between tumor and resection margin in radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prognostic significance.

Robert E Emerson1, Michael O Koch, Joanne K Daggy, Liang Cheng.   

Abstract

Complete removal of the tumor by surgery offers the best chance for cancer cure; however, many prostate cancer patients who have negative surgical margins at radical prostatectomy will still experience local and distant tumor recurrence. In other organs, the closest distance between tumor and resection margin has prognostic significance. This has not been adequately studied in prostatectomy specimens. We undertook a prospective study of 278 consecutive margin-negative whole-mount prostatectomy cases. The anatomic location and closest distance between tumor and resection margin, measured with an ocular micrometer, were analyzed. All the slides were reviewed by a single pathologist, and data were collected prospectively. The closest distance between tumor and resection margin ranged from 0.02 to 5.0 mm (mean, 0.7 mm; median, 0.5 mm) and correlated with patient age (P = 0.03), prostate weight (P = 0.002), Gleason score (P = 0.001), pathologic stage (P = 0.01), tumor volume (P < 0.001), and perineural invasion (P < 0.001). The closest distance between tumor and resection margin was not a significant predictor of PSA recurrence in univariate or multivariate logistic regression; and we do not, therefore, advocate reporting the closest distance between tumor and resection margin as a standard part of the surgical pathology report on prostatectomy specimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15644780     DOI: 10.1097/01.pas.0000146008.47191.76

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  8 in total

1.  Capsular incision in normal prostatic tissue during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a new concept or a waste of time?

Authors:  Nicolas Koutlidis; Céline Duperron; Mathilde Funes de la Vega; Eric Mourey; Frédéric Michel; Luc Cormier
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  The influence of extent of surgical margin positivity on prostate specific antigen recurrence.

Authors:  R E Emerson; M O Koch; T D Jones; J K Daggy; B E Juliar; L Cheng
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  The presence of benign prostatic glandular tissue at surgical margins does not predict PSA recurrence.

Authors:  K M Kernek; M O Koch; J K Daggy; B E Juliar; L Cheng
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Prostate cancer that is within 0.1 mm of the surgical margin of a radical prostatectomy predicts greater likelihood of recurrence.

Authors:  Jason P Izard; Lawrence D True; Philip May; William J Ellis; Paul H Lange; Bruce Dalkin; Daniel W Lin; Rodney A Schmidt; Jonathan L Wright
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 6.394

5.  Frequency of positive surgical margin at prostatectomy and its effect on patient outcome.

Authors:  Kenneth A Iczkowski; M Scott Lucia
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2011-06-09

6.  Significance and management of positive surgical margins at the time of radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jonathan L Silberstein; James A Eastham
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2014-10

Review 7.  Radical or Not-So-Radical Prostatectomy: Do Surgical Margins Matter?

Authors:  Ioanna Maria Grypari; Vasiliki Zolota; Vasiliki Tzelepi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 6.639

8.  Are you now a good surgeon? T2 positive margin status as a quality outcome measure following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Arees Damani; Mieke Van Hemelrijck; Wahyu Wulaningsih; Danielle Crawley; Declan Cahill
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 4.226

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.