Randomized trial comparing an anterograde versus a retrograde approach to open radical prostatectomy: Results in terms of positive margin rate

Journal of the Canadian Urological Association

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 192-198

  Sciarra, Alessandro ^a   Cristini, Cristiano ^a   von Heland, Magnus ^a   Salciccia, Stefano ^a   Gentile, Vincenzo ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953712119     PISSN: 19116470     EISSN: 19116470     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.09089     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Pettus JA, Weight JC, Clinton JT, et al. Biochimical failure in men following radical retropubic prostatectomy: Impact of surgical margin status and location. J Urol 2004;172:129-32.
2. Epstein JL. Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am 1996;23:651-8.
3. Chang SS, Cookson MS. Impact of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2006;68:249-56.
4. Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Riedel E. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J. Urol 2003;170:2292-5.
5. Stephenson RA, Middleton RG, Abbott TM. Wide excision (non nerve sparing) radical retropubic prostatectomy using an initial perirectal dissection. J. Urol 1997;157:251-5.
6. Klein EA, Kupelian PA, Tuason L, et al. Initial dissection of the lateral fascia reduces the positive margin rate in radical prostatectomy. Urology 1998;159:1281-5.
7. Soulie M, Seguin P, Benoit JM. Impact of a modified apical dissection during radical retropubic prostatectomy on the occurrence of positive surgical margins: a comparative study in 212 patients. Urology 2001;58:217-21.
8. Campbell EW: Total prostatectomy with preliminary ligation of the vascular pedicles. J Urol 1959;81:464-7.
9. Sciarra A, Gentile V, De Matteis A, et al. Long-term experience with an anatomical anterograde approach to radical prostatectomy: results in terms of positive margin rate. Urollnt 2008;80:151-6.
10. Serni S, Masieri L, Lapini A, et al. A low incidence of positive surgical margins in prostate cancer at high risk of extracapsular extension after a modified anterograde radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2004;93:279-83.
11. Matsui Y, Utosonomiya N, Ichioka LK, et al. Risk stratification after radical prostatectomy in men with pathologically organ-confined prostate cancer using volume weighted mean nuclear volume. Prostate 2005;64:217-23.
12. Palisaar RJ, Noldus J, Graefen M, et al. Influence of Nerve Sparing procedure during radical prostatectomy on margin status and biochemical failure. Eur Urol 2005;47:176-84.
13. Watson RB, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy:detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. Urology 1996;48:80-8.
14. Walsh PC, Lepor H, Eggleston JC. Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function:anatomical and pathological considerations. Prostate 1983;4:473-85.
15. Epstein Jl, Sauvageot J. Do close but negative margins in radical prostatectomy specimens increase the risk of postoperative progression? JUrol 1997;157:241-9.
16. Connolly SS, 0'Toole GC, 0'Malley KJ, et al. Positive apical surgical margins after radical retropubic prostatectomy, truth or artefact? Scand J. Urol Nephrol 2004;38:26-31.
17. Shah O, Melamed J, Lepor H: Analysis of apical soft tissue margins during radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2001;165:1943-9.
18. Laven BA, Alsikafi NF, Yang XJ, et al. Minor modifications in apical dissection of radical retropubic prostatectomy in patients with clinical stage T2 prostate cancer reduce positive surgical margin incidence. Urology 2004;63:95-8.
19. Richman M, McLaughlin S, Maygarden S, et al. Initial incision of lateral pelvic fascia and early ligation of vascular pedicles during radical prostatectomy: potential to reduce positive margin rates. BJU Int 2005:95:40-5.