Literature DB >> 25347375

Predictors of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy at a single institution: preoperative and pathologic factors, and the impact of surgeon variability and technique on incidence and location.

Costas D Lallas1, Yomi Fashola, Robert B Den, Francisco Gelpi-Hammerschmidt, Anne E Calvaresi, Peter McCue, Ruth Birbe, Leonard G Gomella, Edouard J Trabulsi.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To identify and assess predictive factors for positive surgical margins (PSM) in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Institution Review Board (IRB) approved retrospective review of 1751 patients that underwent RP from March 2000 to June 2013 was performed. Identified were 1740 patients whom had not received neoadjuvant therapy; these were used for the purpose of this analysis. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to determine factors associated with and predictive of PSMs, divided into preoperative and pathological. Variables analyzed include age, body mass index (BMI), race, surgeon, surgical modality, pathologic T-stage and Gleason sum, extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle involvement (SVI), perineural invasion (PNI) and prostate weight. Finally, each surgical technique was analyzed to determine the most common site of PSM.
RESULTS: Rate of PSM was 23.6%. Our analysis showed that preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level ≥ 10ng/mL, and pathologic T3/T4-stage and PNI significantly predicted PSM. Age > 60 years and prostate weight > 60 g were predictive against PSM. Gleason score ≥ 7 and PSM were significant risk factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR). Surgical approach did not affect the rate of PSM. Open RP was associated with a higher apical PSM rate (38.5%) and robotic RP with a higher posterolateral PSM rate (52.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: High preoperative PSA levels, and advanced TNM-staging predicted positive surgical margins in our cohort. Patients with PSM were subsequently found to have higher risk of BCR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25347375

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Urol        ISSN: 1195-9479            Impact factor:   1.344


  5 in total

1.  Prevalence and risk factors of contralateral extraprostatic extension in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for unilateral disease at biopsy: A global multi-institutional experience.

Authors:  Marc Bienz; Pierre-Alain Hueber; Vincent Trudeau; Abdullah M Alenizi; Roger Valdivieso; Modar Alom; Mevlana Derya Balbay; Abdullah Erdem Canda; Vladimir Mouraviev; David M Albala; Assaad El-Hakim; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Mathieu Latour; Fred Saad; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Comparative Effectiveness of Cancer Control and Survival after Robot-Assisted versus Open Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Padraic O'Malley; Bilal Chughtai; Abby Isaacs; Jialin Mao; Jason D Wright; Dawn Hershman; Art Sedrakyan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Does index tumor predominant location influence prognostic factors in radical prostatectomies?

Authors:  Athanase Billis; Leandro L L Freitas; Larissa B E Costa; Camila M Angelis; Kelson R Carvalho; Luis A Magna; Ubirajara Ferreira
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.541

4.  Oncological results at 2 years after robotic radical prostatectomy - the Romanian experience.

Authors:  Iulia Andras; Nicolae Crisan; Radu-Tudor Coman; Horia Logigan; Flavia Epure; Dan Vasile Stanca; Ioan Coman
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2016-01-15

5.  Predictive Factors for Positive Surgical Margins in Patients With Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Lijin Zhang; Hu Zhao; Bin Wu; Zhenlei Zha; Jun Yuan; Yejun Feng
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 6.244

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.