Felix Preisser1, Lena Theissen2, Peter Wild3, Katharina Bartelt2, Luis Kluth2, Jens Köllermann3, Markus Graefen4, Thomas Steuber4, Hartwig Huland4, Derya Tilki5, Frederik Roos2, Andreas Becker2, Felix K-H Chun2, Philipp Mandel2. 1. Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. Electronic address: felix.preisser@kgu.de. 2. Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 3. Department of Pathology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany. 4. Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation (NVBP) and surgical margin status are the main intraoperative factors influencing functional and oncologic outcomes in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of implementing the intraoperative frozen section technique (IFST) during NVBP on the frequency of NVB procedures and its effect on positive surgical margins (PSMs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We relied on an institutional tertiary-care center database to identify patients who underwent RP (January 2014-October 2018). Until October 2017, decision for NVBP was taken based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, clinical characteristics, and nomograms, without the IFST. After November 2017, all patients received bilateral NVBP with the IFST, to check for a PSM in the area of the NVB. If a PSM occurred, a secondary resection of the respective NVB was performed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: PSM and NVB procedures were assessed. Subgroup analyses focused on pathologic tumor stages. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 346 patients were identified. Of these patients, 54.9% (n=190) versus 45.1% (n=156) underwent RP without versus with the IFST. By using the IFST during NVBP, the PSM decreased from 29.5% to 15.4% (p=0.003) in the entire cohort (14.6% vs 8.6% in pT2; 47.1% vs 29.4% in pT3). Conversely, NVBP increased from 55.3% to 95.5% (p<0.001) in the entire cohort (68.9% vs 99.0% in pT2; 39.1% vs 88.2% in pT3). In multivariable logistic regressions, IFST use was an independent predictor of PSMs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.98; p=0.047) and NVBP (OR: 5.60, 95% CI: 3.10-10.51; p<0.001) after controlling for patient and tumor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the IFST during NVBP resulted in more frequent NVBP and was associated with a lower PSM, compared with RP without the IFST. Therefore, the IFST should be performed, if available. PATIENT SUMMARY: The intraoperative frozen section technique (IFST) during preservation of neurovascular bundles (NVBP) should be offered to patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. The IFST can reduce positive margin rates and increase the rate of NVBP.
BACKGROUND: Neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation (NVBP) and surgical margin status are the main intraoperative factors influencing functional and oncologic outcomes in patients with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of implementing the intraoperative frozen section technique (IFST) during NVBP on the frequency of NVB procedures and its effect on positive surgical margins (PSMs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We relied on an institutional tertiary-care center database to identify patients who underwent RP (January 2014-October 2018). Until October 2017, decision for NVBP was taken based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, clinical characteristics, and nomograms, without the IFST. After November 2017, all patients received bilateral NVBP with the IFST, to check for a PSM in the area of the NVB. If a PSM occurred, a secondary resection of the respective NVB was performed. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: PSM and NVB procedures were assessed. Subgroup analyses focused on pathologic tumor stages. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 346 patients were identified. Of these patients, 54.9% (n=190) versus 45.1% (n=156) underwent RP without versus with the IFST. By using the IFST during NVBP, the PSM decreased from 29.5% to 15.4% (p=0.003) in the entire cohort (14.6% vs 8.6% in pT2; 47.1% vs 29.4% in pT3). Conversely, NVBP increased from 55.3% to 95.5% (p<0.001) in the entire cohort (68.9% vs 99.0% in pT2; 39.1% vs 88.2% in pT3). In multivariable logistic regressions, IFST use was an independent predictor of PSMs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.98; p=0.047) and NVBP (OR: 5.60, 95% CI: 3.10-10.51; p<0.001) after controlling for patient and tumor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the IFST during NVBP resulted in more frequent NVBP and was associated with a lower PSM, compared with RP without the IFST. Therefore, the IFST should be performed, if available. PATIENT SUMMARY: The intraoperative frozen section technique (IFST) during preservation of neurovascular bundles (NVBP) should be offered to patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. The IFST can reduce positive margin rates and increase the rate of NVBP.
Authors: Paolo Dell'Oglio; Elio Mazzone; Tessa Buckle; Tobias Maurer; Nassir Navab; Matthias N van Oosterom; Clare Schilling; Max Jh Witjes; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Joachim Klode; Boris Vojnovic; Alexandre Mottrie; Henk G van der Poel; Freddie Hamdy; Fijs Wb van Leeuwen Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-04-15
Authors: Philipp Mandel; Benedikt Hoeh; Felix Preisser; Mike Wenzel; Clara Humke; Maria-Noemi Welte; Inga Jerrentrup; Jens Köllermann; Peter Wild; Derya Tilki; Alexander Haese; Andreas Becker; Frederik C Roos; Felix K H Chun; Luis A Kluth Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: M Wenzel; C Humke; S Wicker; J Mani; T Engl; G Hintereder; T J Vogl; P Wild; J Köllermann; C Rödel; S Asgharie; L Theissen; M Welte; L A Kluth; P Mandel; F K H Chun; F Preisser; A Becker Journal: Urologe A Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Margaretha A van der Slot; Michael A den Bakker; Sjoerd Klaver; Mike Kliffen; Martijn B Busstra; John B W Rietbergen; Melanie Gan; Karen E Hamoen; Leo M Budel; Natascha N T Goemaere; Chris H Bangma; Jozien Helleman; Monique J Roobol; Geert J L H van Leenders Journal: Histopathology Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Matthias Mueller; Lena H Theissen; Maria N Welte; Benedikt Hoeh; Clara Humke; Simon Bernatz; Boris Bodelle; Christoph Würnschimmel; Derya Tilki; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Frederik C Roos; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix K H Chun; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Benedikt Hoeh; Felix Preisser; Mike Wenzel; Clara Humke; Clarissa Wittler; Jan L Hohenhorst; Maja Volckmann-Wilde; Jens Köllermann; Thomas Steuber; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Andreas Becker; Luis A Kluth; Felix K H Chun; Philipp Mandel Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Clara Humke; Benedikt Hoeh; Felix Preisser; Mike Wenzel; Maria N Welte; Lena Theissen; Boris Bodelle; Jens Koellermann; Thomas Steuber; Alexander Haese; Frederik Roos; Luis Alex Kluth; Andreas Becker; Felix K H Chun; Philipp Mandel Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: Benedikt Hoeh; Mike Wenzel; Matthias Müller; Clarissa Wittler; Eva Schlenke; Jan L Hohenhorst; Jens Köllermann; Thomas Steuber; Markus Graefen; Derya Tilki; Simon Bernatz; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix Preisser; Andreas Becker; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel; Felix K H Chun Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2022-03-13