The depth of the prostatic apex is an independent predictor of positive apical margins at radical prostatectomy

BJU International

Volumn 106, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 622-626

  Matikainen, Mika P ^a   Von Bodman, Christian J ^a   Secin, Fernando P ^a   Yunis, Luis Herran ^a   Vora, Kinjal ^a   Guillonneau, Bertrand ^a   Laudone, Vincent ^a   Eastham, James A ^a   Scardino, Peter T ^a   Akin, Oguz ^b   Rabbani, Farhang ^c  

^a Urology Service   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

laparoscopy; MRI; pathology; pelvimetry; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARAMETER; PELVIMETRY; PELVIS; POSITIVE APICAL MARGIN; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC APEX; PUBIS SYMPHYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL APPROACH;

EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; NEOPLASM, RESIDUAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 77955856002     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09184.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Myers RP, Goellner JR, Cahill DR. Prostate shape, external striated urethral sphincter and radical prostatectomy: the apical dissection. J Urol 1987 138 : 543 50
2. Stamey TA, Villers AA, McNeal JE, Link PC, Freiha FS. Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy: importance of the apical dissection. J Urol 1990 143 : 1166 72
3. Gillitzer R, Thüroff JW. Technical advances in radical retropubic prostatectomy techniques for avoiding complications. Part I: apical dissection. BJU Int 2003 92 : 172 7
4. Rabbani F, Herran-Yunis L, Vora K et al. Impact of ethnicity on surgical margins at radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2009 104 : 904 8
5. Hong SK, Chang IH, Han BK et al. Impact of variations in bony pelvic dimensions on performing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2007 69 : 907 11
6. Neill MG, Lockwood GA, McCluskey SA, Fleshner NE. Preoperative evaluation of the 'hostile pelvis' in radical prostatectomy with computed tomographic pelvimetry. BJU Int 2007 99 : 534 8
7. Baik SH, Kim NK, Lee KY et al. Factors influencing pathologic results after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: analysis of consecutive 100 cases. Ann Surg Oncol 2008 15 : 721 8
8. Boyle KM, Petty D, Chalmers AG et al. MRI assessment of the bony pelvis may help predict resectability of rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2005 7 : 232 40
9. Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F, Wheeler TM, Kattan MW, Scardino PT. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 2002 167 : 528 34
10. Shikanov S, Song J, Royce C et al. Length of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy as a predictor of biochemical recurrence. J Urol 2009 182 : 139 44
11. Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M et al. Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2007 70 : 965 9
12. Ward JF, Zincke H, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak JM, Myers RP, Blute ML. The impact of surgical approach (nerve bundle preservation versus wide local excision) on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004 172 : 1328 32
13. Pettus JA, Weight CJ, Thompson CJ, Middleton RG, Stephenson RA. Biochemical failure in men following radical retropubic prostatectomy: impact of surgical margin status and location. J Urol 2004 172 : 129 32
14. 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 7
15. Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 2005 66 : 1245 50
16. Simon MA, Kim S, Soloway MS. Prostate specific antigen recurrence rates are low after radical retropubic prostatectomy and positive margins. J Urol 2006 175 : 140 4
17. Cheng L, Darson MF, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak J, Myers RP, Bostwick DG. Correlation of margin status and extraprostatic extension with progression of prostate carcinoma. Cancer 1999 86 : 1775 82
18. Guru KA, Perlmutter AE, Sheldon MJ et al. Apical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: does technique matter? J Endourol 2009 23 : 123 7
19. Epstein JI. Incidence and significance of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urol Clin North Am 1996 23 : 651 63
20. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H, Cohen R. Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol 1995 153 : 1565 9
21. Epstein JI, Pizov G, Walsh PC. Correlation of pathologic findings with progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 1993 71 : 3582 93
22. Turner W. The index of the pelvic brim as a basis of classification. J Anat Physiol 1885 20 : 125 43