OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate cautery artifacts histopathologically in tissue specimens after plasmakinetic prostate resection (PKRP) and transurethral prostatectomy (TURP), and compare the results of the two procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The histopathological specimens of 65 patients who underwent PKRP and TURP were examined retrospectively. Tissue chips for examination were selected randomly. Artifactual pathological patterns that were identified in the specimens included: abnormal cellular orientation and spindling, artifactual cellular detachment from the underlying basement membrane, atypical cytological changes and stromal coagulative necrosis. Each pattern identified was awarded 1 point. The severity of the cautery artefact was graded as absent, mild, moderate or severe according to the sum of points in each specimen. RESULTS: In TURP, the artefacts were graded absent (9%), mild (6%), moderate (18.7%), and severe (65.6%) changes. In PKRP, the artefacts were graded absent (6%), mild (18.1%), moderate (36.3%), and severe (39.4%) changes. While the number of mild and moderate artefacts observed was higher in PKRP (P = 0.023), severe artefacts were observed in higher numbers with TURP (P = 0.034). No prostate cancer was detected during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: It has been observed that the application of TURP causes fewer mild to moderate artefacts and PKRP causes fewer severe artefacts in the histopathological evaluation of specimens in comparison to each other.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate cautery artifacts histopathologically in tissue specimens after plasmakinetic prostate resection (PKRP) and transurethral prostatectomy (TURP), and compare the results of the two procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The histopathological specimens of 65 patients who underwent PKRP and TURP were examined retrospectively. Tissue chips for examination were selected randomly. Artifactual pathological patterns that were identified in the specimens included: abnormal cellular orientation and spindling, artifactual cellular detachment from the underlying basement membrane, atypical cytological changes and stromal coagulative necrosis. Each pattern identified was awarded 1 point. The severity of the cautery artefact was graded as absent, mild, moderate or severe according to the sum of points in each specimen. RESULTS: In TURP, the artefacts were graded absent (9%), mild (6%), moderate (18.7%), and severe (65.6%) changes. In PKRP, the artefacts were graded absent (6%), mild (18.1%), moderate (36.3%), and severe (39.4%) changes. While the number of mild and moderate artefacts observed was higher in PKRP (P = 0.023), severe artefacts were observed in higher numbers with TURP (P = 0.034). No prostate cancer was detected during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: It has been observed that the application of TURP causes fewer mild to moderate artefacts and PKRP causes fewer severe artefacts in the histopathological evaluation of specimens in comparison to each other.