Clinical Significance of Benign Glands at Surgical Margins in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy Specimens

Urology

Volumn 69, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1112-1116

  Kohl, Shane K ^a   Balaji, Kethandapatti C ^a   Smith, Lynette M ^b   Wilson, Nicholas P ^a   Johansson, Sonny L ^a   Sterrett, Samuel P ^a   Abrahams, Neil A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL MARGIN; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TISSUE SECTION;

ADENOCARCINOMA; AGED; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 34250009784     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.02.048     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Perrotti M., and Moran M.E. Robotic prostatectomy outcomes. Urol Oncol 23 (2005) 341-345
2. Menon M., Tewari A., Baize B., et al. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the Vattikuti Urology Institute experience. Urology 60 (2002) 864-868
3. Menon M., and Tewari A. Robotic radical prostatectomy and the Vattikuti Urology Institute technique: an interim analysis of results and technical points. Urology 61 (2003) 15-20
4. Ahlering T.E., Woo D., Eichel L., et al. Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon's outcomes. Urology 63 (2004) 819-822
5. Bentas W., Wolfram M., Jones J., et al. Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow-up. Eur Urol 44 (2003) 175-181
6. Cathelineau X., Rozet F., and Vallancien G. Robotic radical prostatectomy: the European experience. Urol Clin North Am 31 (2004) 693-699 viii
7. Ahlering T.E., Skarecky D., Lee D., et al. Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 170 (2003) 1738-1741
8. Menon M., Shrivastava A., Tewari A., et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168 (2002) 945-949
9. Ravery V. The significance of recurrent PSA after radical prostatectomy: benign versus malignant sources. Semin Urol Oncol 17 (1999) 127-129
10. Ravery V., de la Taille A., Toublanc M., et al. Prostate specimen reevaluation in patients with organ confined prostate cancer and postoperative biological recurrence. J Urol 155 (1996) 1981-1982
11. Wood Jr. D.P., Peretsman S.J., and Seay T.M. Incidence of benign and malignant prostate tissue in biopsies of the bladder neck after a radical prostatectomy. J Urol 154 (1995) 1443-1446
12. Babaian R.J., Troncoso P., Bhadkamkar V.A., et al. Analysis of clinicopathologic factors predicting outcome after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 91 (2001) 1414-1422
13. Chen M.E., Johnston D., Reyes A.O., et al. A streamlined three-dimensional volume estimation method accurately classifies prostate tumors by volume. Am J Surg Pathol 27 (2003) 1291-1301
14. Epstein J.I. Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am 23 (1996) 651-663
15. Epstein J.I., Pizov G., and Walsh P.C. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 71 (1993) 3582-3593
16. Hall G.S., Kramer C.E., and Epstein J.I. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens: a comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am J Surg Pathol 16 (1992) 315-324
17. Barocas D.A., Han M., Epstein J.I., et al. Does capsular incision at radical retropubic prostatectomy affect disease-free survival in otherwise organ-confined prostate cancer?. Urology 58 (2001) 746-751
18. Boccon-Gibod L., Ravery V., Vordos D., et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the perineal approach increases the risk of surgically induced positive margins and capsular incisions. J Urol 160 (1998) 1383-1385
19. Watson R.B., Civantos F., and Soloway M.S. Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology 48 (1996) 80-90
20. Shah R., Bassily N., Wei J., et al. Benign prostatic glands at surgical margins of radical prostatectomy specimens: frequency and associated risk factors. Urology 56 (2000) 721-725
21. Djavan B., Sesterhann I., and Hruby S. Benign prostatic glands in the surgical margin of radical retropubic prostatectomies: redefining PSA nadir. J Urol 163 (2000) A624