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

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 32, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 1201-1206

  Chuang, Ai Ying ^a,b,c   Epstein, Jonathan I ^c  

^a Department of Pathology   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL YANG MING UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Capsular incision; Margin; Prostate; Prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CAPSULAR INCISION; CLINICAL FEATURE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL ERROR; PROSTATE SURGERY; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; HUMANS; MALE; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 49249085072     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: 15320979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318162a8bf     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. 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. 1998;160:1383-1385.
2. Cheng L, Darson MF, Bergstralh EJ, et al. Correlation of margin status and extraprostatic extension with progression of prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 1999;86:1775-1782.
3. Chuang AY, Nielsen ME, Hernandez DJ, et al. The significance of positive surgical margin in areas of capsular incision in otherwise organ confined disease at radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2007;178: 1306-1310.
4. Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy capsular margins of resection. The significance of margins designated as negative, closely approaching, and positive. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990;14:626-632.
5. Epstein JI. Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am. 1996;23:651-663.
6. Epstein JI, Sauvageot J. Do close but negative margins in radical prostatectomy specimens increase the risk of postoperative progression? J Urol. 1997;157:241-243.
7. Epstein JI, Amin M, Boccon-Gibod L, et al. Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 2005; 39:34-63.
8. Shuford MD, Cookson MS, Chang SS, et al. Adverse prognostic significance of capsular incision with radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2004;172:119-123.
9. Swindle P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, et al. Do margins matter? The prognostic significance of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol. 2005;174:903-907.
10. van den Ouden D, Bentvelsen FM, Boeve ER, et al. Positive margins after radical prostatectomy: correlation with local recurrence and distant progression. Br J Urol. 1993;72:489-494.
11. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology. 1996;48:80-90.