Literature DB >> 21820147

Characteristics of positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, open retropubic radical prostatectomy, and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a comparative histopathologic study from a single academic center.

Roula Albadine1, Matthew E Hyndman, Alcides Chaux, J Y Jeong, Shahrazad Saab, Fabio Tavora, Jonathan I Epstein, Mark L Gonzalgo, Christian P Pavlovich, George J Netto.   

Abstract

Studies detailing differences in positive surgical margin among open retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy are lacking. A retrospective review of all prostatectomies with positive surgical margin performed at our center in 2007 disclosed 99 cases, 6 (5%) of which were reinterpreted cases as having negative margins. Ninety-three cases were, therefore, included, corresponding to 37 retropubic radical prostatectomies, 19 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies, and 37 robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. The relationship of positive surgical margin characteristics to clinicopathologic parameters and biochemical recurrence was assessed. The most commonly found positive surgical margin site was the apex/distal third in all groups (62% retropubic prostatectomies, 79% laparoscopic prostatectomies, 60% robotic-assisted prostatectomies). Total linear length of positive surgical margin sites was significantly correlated with preoperative prostate-specific antigen, preoperative prostate-specific antigen density, pT stage, and tumor volume (P ≤ .001). We found no significant differences among the 3 groups with respect to total linear length, number of foci, laterality, or location of positive surgical margin. The rate of biochemical recurrence was also comparable in the 3 groups. On univariate analyses, biochemical recurrence was significantly associated with preoperative prostate-specific antigen values, preoperative prostate-specific antigen density, Gleason score, number of positive surgical margins, and total linear length of positive surgical margin (P ≤ .02). Only preoperative prostate-specific antigen density and number of positive surgical margin foci were statistically significant (P ≤ .03) independent predictors of biochemical recurrence. We found no significant difference in positive surgical margin characteristics or biochemical recurrence among the 3 radical prostatectomy modalities. Preoperative prostate-specific antigen density and number of positive surgical margin foci were the only independent predictors of biochemical recurrence.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21820147     DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2011.04.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Pathol        ISSN: 0046-8177            Impact factor:   3.466


  8 in total

1.  Do robotic prostatectomy positive surgical margins occur in the same location as extraprostatic extension?

Authors:  Matthew T Johnson; Mitchell L Ramsey; Joshua J Ebel; Ronney Abaza; Debra L Zynger
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-06       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  A multi-surgeon learning curve analysis of overall and site-specific positive surgical margins after RARP and implications for training.

Authors:  Carlo Gandi; Angelo Totaro; Riccardo Bientinesi; Filippo Marino; Francesco Pierconti; Maurizio Martini; Andrea Russo; Marco Racioppi; PierFrancesco Bassi; Emilio Sacco
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-02-28

3.  Versatility of 3D laproscopy for radical prostatectomy: A single tertiary cancer center experience.

Authors:  Dipin Jayaprakash; Keval Patel; Mohamed Mithi; Harish Neelamraju Lakshmi; Shahsank Pandya
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-02-14

Review 4.  The comparative oncologic effectiveness of available management strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mark D Tyson; David F Penson; Matthew J Resnick
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.498

5.  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

6.  Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A prospective 2-year single-surgeon experience with 171 cases.

Authors:  Tito Palmela Leitão; Athanasios G Papatsoris; Eric Mandron
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2012-10-27

7.  Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy in high prostate volume cases: impact on oncological and functional results.

Authors:  Sciarra Alessandro; Gentilucci Alessandro; Cattarino Susanna; Innocenzi Michele; Di Quilio Francesca; Fasulo Andrea; Magnus Von Heland; Gentile Vincenzo; Salciccia Stefano
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  Does Gleason score of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence and oncological outcomes? Protocol for systematic review.

Authors:  Athul John; Michael O'Callaghan; Rick Catterwell; Luke Selth
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.