Literature DB >> 1728383

Morphologic analysis of surgical margins with positive findings in prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate.

G E Voges1, J E McNeal, E A Redwine, F S Freiha, T A Stamey.   

Abstract

Apical invasion and positive apical margins were assessed in 165 consecutive radical prostatectomies. Apical invasion, defined as cancer in the distal 8 mm of the prostate, was evident in more than 80% of the cases, and apical margins occurred in 16% of the specimens with apical Clinical judgement was not effective in predicting apical cancer. Frequency of apical margins increased in proportion to greater cancer volume, from 9.8% in cancers smaller than 4 cc to 30.7% in cancers larger than 12 cc. However, most positive margins in the group with cancers smaller than 4 cc were caused by inadvertent incision into the prostate during the operation, whereas the vast majority of apical margins in cancers larger than 4 cc were caused by capsule penetration of the tumor. Although margins associated with capsule penetration occurred characteristically in the posterior (rectal) portion of the apex, margins caused by incision into the prostate were distributed over the entire apical surface of the gland. Positive margins at the urethral stump were quite uncommon (occurring in four cases). These findings suggest that modifications of surgical technique might reduce the frequency of this complication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1728383     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19920115)69:2<520::aid-cncr2820690240>3.0.co;2-v

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  9 in total

Review 1.  Prostate cancer: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  S N Pentyala; J Lee; K Hsieh; W C Waltzer; A Trocchia; L Musacchia; M J Rebecchi; S A Khan
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.064

2.  Local staging of prostate carcinoma with endorectal coil MRI: correlation with whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  C Bartolozzi; I Menchi; R Lencioni; S Serni; A Lapini; G Barbanti; A Bozza; A Amorosi; A Manganelli; M Carini
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Primary staging of prostate cancer.

Authors:  G J Jager; J O Barentz; E T Ruijter; J J de la Rosette; G O Oosterhof
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Evaluating radical prostatectomy specimens: therapeutic and prognostic importance.

Authors:  D G Bostwick; R Montironi
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  Prostate-specific antigen testing in Ontario: reasons for testing patients without diagnosed prostate cancer.

Authors:  P S Bunting; V Goel; J I Williams; N A Iscoe
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-01-12       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 6.  Stage T1c prostate cancer: defining the appropriate staging evaluation and the role for pelvic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  M C Beduschi; R Beduschi; J E Oesterling
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Expectant management as an option for men with stage T1c prostate cancer: a preliminary study.

Authors:  J L Mohler; B T Williams; J A Freeman
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  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

9.  Planning primary therapy.

Authors:  P Whelan
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2000-10-10       Impact factor: 3.909

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.