PTU - Polskie Towarzystwo Urologiczne
home page
current numbers
archival numbers
list of articles:
list przewodni/covering letter
editor
Scientific Committee
publisher
subscription
advertising
important links

Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Part I
Article published in Urologia Polska 2006/59/2.

authors

Jakub Dobruch 1, Andrzej Borówka 1, Tomasz Dzik 2, Przemysław Szostek 1, Artur A. Antoniewicz 1, Piotr Chłosta 3
1 Klinika Urologii Centrum Medycznego Kształcenia Podyplomowego, I Zespół Dydaktyki Urologicznej - Oddział Urologii Międzyleskiego Szpitala Specjalistycznego w Warszawie
2 Zakład Patomorfologii Międzyleskiego Szpitala Specjalistycznego w Warszawie
3 Dział Urologii Świętokrzyskiego Centrum Onkologii w Kielcach

keywords

prostate, prostate cancer, positive surgical margins

summary

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers found in men. Radical prostatectomy is a fundamental way of treatment of clinically organ confined prostate cancer. Despite surgery, biochemical failure is frequently observed. Many factors were established to suggest the risk of prostate cancer failure. State of surgical margins is one of them. In the present paper definition, types and incidence of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy are presented. The factors that influence positive surgical margins occurrence are also described.

references

  1. Aus G, Abbou A, Heidenreich A et al: EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer -- Zasady postępowania u chorych na raka gruczołu krokowego. Warszawa, Biuro Wydawnicze PTU, 2004, 22-70.
  2. Zdrojowy R: Postępowanie terapeutyczne w przypadku raka stercza zaawansowanego miejscowo -- własna koncepcja rozszerzonej radykalnej prostatektomii połączonej z indukcyjną i uzupełniającą maksymalną blokadą androgenową. Rozprawa habilitacyjna. Wrocław 2000, 208-262.
  3. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H: Continence, potency and morbidity after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol 1997, 158, 1470-1475.
  4. Cathelineau X, Cahill D, Widmer H et al: Transperitoneal or extraperitoneal approach for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a false debate over a real challenge. J Urol 2004, 171, 714-716.
  5. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS: Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urol 1996, 48, 80-90.
  6. Stamey TA, Kabalin JN, McNeal JE et al: Prostate specific antigen in the diagnosis and treatment of adenocarcinoma of the prostate. II. Radical prostatectomy treated patients. J Urol 1989, 141, 1076-1083.
  7. Zietman AL, Coen JJ, Shipley WU, Althausen AF: Adjuvant irradiation after radical prostatectomy for adenocarcinoma of prostate: analysis of freedom from PSA failure. Urology 1993, 42, 292-298.
  8. van den Ouden D, Bentvelsen FM, Boeve ER, Schroder FH: Positive margins after radical prostatectomy: correlation with local recurrence and distant progression. Brit J Urol 1993, 72, 489-494.
  9. Stamey TA, Villers AA, McNeal JE et al: Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy: importance of the apical dissection. J Urol 1990, 143, 1166-1172.
  10. Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW et al: Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radicalprostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1995, 154, 1818-1824.
  11. Hall GS, Kramer CE, Epstein JI: Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens. A comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am J Surg Path 1992, 16, 315-324.
  12. Laven BA, Alsikafi NF, Yang XJ, Brendler CB: Minor modifications in apical dissection of radical retropubic prostatectomy in patients with clinical stage T2 prostate cancer reduce positive surgical margin incidence. Urology 2004, 63, 95-98.
  13. Djavan B, Milani S, Kit Fong Y: Benign positive margines after radical prostatectomy means a poor prognosis -- pro. Urol 2005, 65, 218-220.
  14. Wieder JA, Soloway MS: Incidence, etiology, location, prevention and treatment of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 1998, 160, 299-315.
  15. Zdrojowy R: Porównanie oceny miejscowego zaawansowania raka stercza określonej badaniem (TDRE) i przezodbytniczym badaniem ultrasonograficznym (TTRUS) z oceną histopatologiczną (PT). Urol Pol 2000, 53, 178-187.
  16. Sciarra A, Voria G, Monti S et al: Clinical understaging in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma submitted to radical prostatectomy: predictive value of serum chromogranin A. Prostate 2004, 58, 421-8.
  17. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM et al: Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer recurrence and the use of secondary cancer treatment: data from the CAPSURE database. J Urol 2000, 163, 1171-1177.
  18. Partin AW, Pound CR, Clemens JQ et al: Serum PSA after anatomic radical prostatectomy. The John Hopkins experience after 10 years. Urol Clin N Am 1993, 20, 713-725.
  19. Cookson MS, Sogani, Russo P et al: Pathological staging and biochemical recurrence after neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy in combination with radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: results of a phase II study. Br J Urol 1997, 79, 432-438.
  20. Pound CR, Partin AW, Epstein JI et al: Prostate-specific antigen after anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Patterns of recurrence and cancer control. Urol Clin N Am 1997, 24, 395-406.
  21. Geary ES, Stamey TA: Pathological characteristics and prognosis of nonpalpable and palpable prostate cancers with a Hybritech prostate specific antigen of 4 to 10 ng/mL. J Urol 1996, 156, 1056-1058.
  22. Ackerman DA, Barry JM, Wicklund RA et al: Analysis of risk factors associated with prostate cancer extension to the surgical margin and pelvic node metastasis at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1993, 150, 1845-1850.
  23. Ohori M, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW et al: Prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radicalprostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1995, 154, 1818-1824.
  24. Scaletscky R, Kock MO, Eckstein CW et al: Tumor volume and stage in carcinoma of the prostate detected by elevation in prostate specific antigen. J Urol 1994, 152, 129-131.
  25. van den Ouden D, Bentvelsen FM, Boeve ER et al: Positive margins after radical prostatectomy: correlation with local recurrence and distant progression. Brit J Urol 1993, 72, 489-494.
  26. Van Poppel H, Goethuys H, Callawaert P et al: Radical prostatectomy can provide a cure for well-selected clinical stage T3 prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2000, 38, 372-379.
  27. van den Ouden D, Hop WCJ, Schröder FU: Progression in and survival of patients with locally advenced prostate cancer (T3) treated with radical prostatectomy as monotherapy. J Urol 1998, 160, 1392-1397.
  28. Villers A, McNeal JE, Redwine EA et al: The role of perineural space invasion in the local spread of prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol 1989, 142, 763-768.
  29. McNeal JE, Villers AA, Redwine EA et al: Capsular penetration in prostate cancer. Significance for natural history and treatment. Am J Surg Path 1990, 14, 240-247.
  30. Zincke H, Oesterling JE, Blute ML et al: Long term (15 years) results after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized (stage T2c or lower) prostate cancer. J Urol 1994, 152, 1850-1857.
  31. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC: Correlation of pathologic findings with proggressin after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 1993, 71, 3582-3593.
  32. Shelfo SW, Obek C, Soloway MS: Update on bladder neck preservation during radical retropubic prostatectomy: impact on pathologic outcome, anastomotic strictures and continence. Urology 1998, 51, 73-78.
  33. Wahle S, Reznicek M, Fallon B et al: Incidence of surgical margin involvement in various forms of radical prostatectomy. Urol 1990, 36, 23-26.
  34. Rosen MA, Goldstone L, Lapin S et al: Frequency and location of extracapsular extension and positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1992, 148, 331-337.
  35. Boccon-Gibod L, Ravery V, Vordos D et al: Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the perineal approach increases the pisk of surgically induced positive margines and capsular incisions. J Urol 1998, 160, 1383-1385.
  36. Harris MJ: Urethral sparing anatomic radical perineal prostatectomy the end of post-prostatectomy incontinence. J Urol 1997, 157 (Pt2), 389A.
  37. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H et al: Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol 1995, 153, 1565-1569.
  38. Guilloneau B, Vallancien G: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol 2000, 163, 418-422.
  39. Sofer M, Hamilton-Nelson KL, Schlesselman JJ, Soloway MS: Risk of positive margins and biochemical recurrence in relation to nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20, 1853-1658.
  40. Stamey TA, Villers AA, McNeal JE et al: Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy: importance of the apical dissection. J Urol 1990, 143, 1166-1123.
  41. Shah O, Robbins DA, Melamed J, Lepor H: The New York University nerve sparing algorithm decreases the rate of positive surgical margins following radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2003, 169, 2147-2152.
  42. Shah O, Melamed J, Lepor H: Analysis of apical soft tissue margins during radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2001, 165, 1943-1948.
  43. Salomon L, Anastasiadis AG, Levrel O et al: Location of positive surgical margins after retropubic, perineal, and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for organ-confined prostate cancer. Urology 2003, 61, 386-390.
  44. Soulie M, Aziza R, Escourrou G et al: Assessment of the risk of positive surgical margins with pelvic phased-array magnetic resonance imaging in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: a prospective study. Urology 2001, 58, 228-232.
  45. Fromont G, Guillonneau B, Validire P, Vallancien G: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. preliminary pathologic evaluation. Urol 2002, 60, 661-665.
  46. Marcovich R, Wojno KJ, Wei JT et al: Bladder neck-sparing modification of radical prostatectomy adversely affects surgical margins in pathologic T3a prostate cancer. Urology 2000, 55, 904-908.
  47. Sofer M, Savoie M, Kim SS et al: Biochemical and pathological predictors of the recurrence of prostatic adenocarcinoma with seminal vesicle invasion. J Urol 2003, 169, 153-156.
  48. Braslis KG, Petsch M, Lim A: Bladder neck preservation following radical prostatectomy: continence and margins. Eur Urol 1995, 28, 202-208.
  49. Rabbani F, Bastar A, Fair WR: Site specific predictors of positive margins at radical prostatectomy: an argument for risk based modification of technique. J Urol 1998, 160, 1727-1733.
  50. Obek C, Sadek S, Lai S et al: Positive surgical margins with radical retropubic prostatectomy: anatomic site-specific pathologic analysis and impact on prognosis. Urology 1999, 54, 682-688.
  51. Shekarriz B. Tiguert R, Upadhyay J et al: Impact of location and multifocality of positive surgical margins on disease-free survival following radical prostatectomy: a comparison between African-American and white men. Urology 2000, 55, 899-903.
  52. Lance RS, Freidrichs PA, Kane C et al: A comparison of radical retropubic with perineal prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer within the Uniformed Services Urology Research Group. BJU Int 2001, 87, 61-65.
  53. Cheng L, Slezak J, Bergstralh EJ et al: Preoperative prediction of surgical margin status in patients with prostate cancer treated by radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18, 2862-2868.
  54. Smith RC, Partin AW, Epstein JI, Brendler CB: Extended followup of the influence of wide excision of the neurovascular bundle (s) on prognosis in men with clinically localized prostate cancer and extensive capsular perforation. J Urol 1996, 156, 454-457.
  55. Katz R, Salomon L, Hoznek A et al: Positive surgical margins in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the impact of apical dissection, bladder neck remodeling and nerve preservation. J Urol 2003, 169, 2049-2052.

correspondence

Jakub Dobruch
Międzyleski Szpital Specjalistyczny
ul. Bursztynowa 2
04-749 Warszawa
0 503 072 230
kubadobr@wp.pl