Literature DB >> 18580493

Positive surgical margins in areas of capsular incision in otherwise organ-confined disease at radical prostatectomy: histologic features and pitfalls.

Ai-Ying Chuang1, Jonathan I Epstein.   

Abstract

Capsular incision (CI) refers to the urologist transecting either benign or malignant prostatic tissue, where the edge of the prostate in this region is left within the patient. Histologic assessment of CI is difficult and its diagnosis varies among pathologists. Between 1993 and 2004, we reviewed 186 radical prostatectomies that were signed out as either: (1) CI into tumor in otherwise organ-confined disease [elsewhere no extra-prostatic extension (EPE), seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node spread] (n=143); (2) positive surgical margin in an area difficult to distinguish EPE from CI into tumor in otherwise organ-confined disease (n=36); or (3) equivocal positive surgical margin in an area difficult to distinguish organ-confined disease with tumor close to resection margins (OC M-) from CI into tumor in otherwise organ-confined disease (n=7). On review, CI with a positive margin was confirmed in 83.2% of cases. Of cases signed out with margins positive where it was difficult to distinguish CI from EPE, CI was confirmed in 52.8% of cases. Cases with equivocal positive margins with either CI or OC M- were considered CI with positive margins in 57.1% of cases on review. Cases in all 3 groups not considered positive margins with CI were on review equally divided between diagnoses of organ-confined margin negative and EPE with positive margins. The locations of the 39 cases originally misdiagnosed as definitive or questionable CI with positive margins were posterolateral (N=19, 48.7%), distal (N=12, 30.8%), posterior (N=6, 15.4%), and anterolateral (N=2, 5.1%). Familiarity with different patterns of EPE in different anatomic locations and applying strict criteria for diagnosing CI into tumor can minimize overcalling CI and can provide accurate feedback to urologists to prevent iatrogenic positive margins.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18580493     DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318162a8bf

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


  10 in total

1.  Prognostic factors identifying biochemical recurrence in patients with positive margins after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Ioannis Anastasiou; Stavros I Tyritzis; Ioannis Adamakis; Dionysios Mitropoulos; Konstantinos G Stravodimos; Ioannis Katafigiotis; Antonios Balangas; Anastasios Kollias; Kitty Pavlakis; Constantinos A Constantinides
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Surgical margin status among men with organ-confined (pT2) prostate cancer: a population-based study.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Andrew Evans; John Srigley; Joseph L Chin; Bish Bora; Amber Hunter; Robin McLeod; Neil E Fleshner
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Impact of surgeon-defined capsular incision during radical prostatectomy on biochemical recurrence rates.

Authors:  Philipp Mandel; Su J Oh; Christoph Hagner; Pierre Tennstedt; Maximilian C Kriegmair; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?

Authors:  Abbas Basiri; Jean Jmch de la Rosette; Shahin Tabatabaei; Henry H Woo; M Pilar Laguna; Hamidreza Shemshaki
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Robotic Surgical System for Radical Prostatectomy: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2017-07-07

6.  Risk Factors for Intraprostatic Incision into Malignant Glands at Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Sung-Woo Park; Nathaniel Readal; Byong Chang Jeong; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Jonathan I Epstein; Alan W Partin; Misop Han
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  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

8.  Determinants and effects of positive surgical margins after prostatectomy on prostate cancer mortality: a population-based study.

Authors:  Valesca P Retèl; Christine Bouchardy; Massimo Usel; Isabelle Neyroud-Caspar; Franz Schmidlin; Gregory Wirth; Christophe Iselin; Raymond Miralbell; Elisabetta Rapiti
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 2.264

9.  Pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging can predict prostate cancer with risk for positive surgical margins.

Authors:  M Quentin; L Schimmöller; T Ullrich; B Valentin; D Demetrescu; R Al-Monajjed; D Mally; I Esposito; P Albers; G Antoch; C Arsov
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-05-16

10.  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

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.