Literature DB >> 25088822

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

Sung-Woo Park1, Nathaniel Readal2, Byong Chang Jeong3, Elizabeth B Humphreys2, Jonathan I Epstein4, Alan W Partin2, Misop Han2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Histologically identified intraprostatic incision (IPI) into malignant glands is associated with an increase in biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy (RP). However, the predictor of IPI is poorly evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors for IPI into cancer during RP for clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between January 1993 and July 2013, 19 986 men with clinically localized PCa underwent RP at our institution. This study includes 14 434 cases that had complete clinicopathologic data. IPI was defined as an iatrogenic incision into the prostate resulting in the presence of malignant glands at the inked surgical margin, regardless of accompanying pathologic features. INTERVENTION: Open, retropubic, robot-assisted laparoscopic and pure laparoscopic RP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted for risk factors of IPI in RP specimens. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The overall incidence of IPI into malignant tissue was noted in 410 (2.8%) cases. In multivariable analysis, obesity, lower prostate weight, surgeon experience, and pure laparoscopic RP were associated with a higher risk of IPI. The odds ratios (OR) for body mass index and prostate weight were 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.08; p<0.001) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-0.99, p<0.001), respectively. The ORs for surgeon experience (>250 cases) and pure laparoscopic RP compared to open RP were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.90, p=0.005) and 2.05 (95% CI, 1.35-3.11; p=0.001), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of IPI during RP is higher in men with obesity and lower prostate weight. In addition, a pure laparoscopic RP and the early series of each surgeon were associated with a higher risk of IPI. However, tumor characteristics were not associated with the IPI occurrence. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Intraprostatic incision occurrence is associated with obesity, small prostate, and surgeon experience and laparoscopic technique but not Gleason score and tumor stage.
Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pathology; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25088822      PMCID: PMC4312547          DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.07.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  30 in total

Review 1.  Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Walter Artibani; Andrea Cestari; Antonio Galfano; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Bertrand Guillonneau; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul Patel; Jens Rassweiler; Hendrik Van Poppel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-01-25       Impact factor: 20.096

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

Authors:  Ai-Ying Chuang; Jonathan I Epstein
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  Positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study.

Authors:  Vipul R Patel; Rafael F Coelho; Bernardo Rocco; Marcelo Orvieto; Ananthakrishnan Sivaraman; Kenneth J Palmer; Darien Kameh; Luigi Santoro; Geoff D Coughlin; Michael Liss; Wooju Jeong; John Malcolm; Joshua M Stern; Saurabh Sharma; Kevin C Zorn; Sergey Shikanov; Arieh L Shalhav; Gregory P Zagaja; Thomas E Ahlering; Koon H Rha; David M Albala; Michael D Fabrizio; David I Lee; Sanket Chauhan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Does capsular incision at radical retropubic prostatectomy affect disease-free survival in otherwise organ-confined prostate cancer?

Authors:  D A Barocas; M Han; J I Epstein; D Y Chan; B J Trock; P C Walsh; A W Partin
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Fatih Atug; Erik P Castle; Sudesh K Srivastav; Scott V Burgess; Raju Thomas; Rodney Davis
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Is body mass index associated with pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy in Korean men?

Authors:  Sang Eun Lee; Won Ki Lee; Min Soo Jeong; Murad Abdullajanov; Dae Sung Kim; Hong Zoo Park; Sung Jin Jeong; Cheol Yong Yoon; Seok-Soo Byun; Gheeyoung Choe; Sung Kyu Hong
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Impact of surgical margin status on prostate-cancer-specific mortality.

Authors:  Heather J Chalfin; Michael Dinizo; Bruce J Trock; Zhaoyong Feng; Alan W Partin; Patrick C Walsh; Elizabeth Humphreys; Misop Han
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Adverse prognostic impact of capsular incision at radical prostatectomy for Japanese men with clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Masafumi Kumano; Hideaki Miyake; Mototsugu Muramaki; Toshifumi Kurahashi; Atsushi Takenaka; Masato Fujisawa
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2008-09-11       Impact factor: 2.370

9.  A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Joseph A Smith; Robert C Chan; Sam S Chang; S Duke Herrell; Peter E Clark; Roxy Baumgartner; Michael S Cookson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Impact of capsular incision on biochemical recurrence after radical perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  K W Kwak; H M Lee; H Y Choi
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 5.554

View more
  2 in total

1.  Clinicopathological Analysis of the ISUP Grade Group And Other Parameters in Prostate Cancer: Elucidation of Mutual Impact of the Various Parameters.

Authors:  Yoichiro Okubo; Shinya Sato; Kimito Osaka; Yayoi Yamamoto; Takahisa Suzuki; Arika Ida; Emi Yoshioka; Masaki Suzuki; Kota Washimi; Tomoyuki Yokose; Takeshi Kishida; Yohei Miyagi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 6.244

2.  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

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.