Handling of radical prostatectomy specimens

Histopathology

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 118-124

  Egevad, Lars ^a  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Biobanking; Fixation; Handling; Pathology; Prostate cancer; Prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

FORMALDEHYDE; LIQUID NITROGEN;

ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER THERAPY; CONSENSUS; DESICCATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; LOW TEMPERATURE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RECURRENT DISEASE; REVIEW; RISK; RISK FACTOR; RNA DEGRADATION; SCALPEL; SEMINAL VESICLE; TISSUE MICROARRAY; TISSUE SECTION; TISSUE SLICE; VAS DEFERENS; WEIGHT;

FORMALDEHYDE; HUMANS; MALE; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; SPECIMEN HANDLING;

EID: 84255162955     PISSN: 03090167     EISSN: 13652559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.04002.x     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Chicago: Springer, 2010.
2. Egevad L, Srigley JR, Delahunt B. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens: rationale and organization. Mod. Pathol. 2011; 24; 1-5.
3. Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod. Pathol. 2011; 24; 6-15.
4. Berney DM, Wheeler TM, Grignon DJ et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. Mod. Pathol. 2011; 24; 39-47.
5. Tan PH, Cheng L, Srigley JR et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 5: surgical margins. Mod. Pathol. 2011; 24; 48-57.
6. Egevad L, Algaba F, Berney DM et al. Handling and reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens in Europe: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP). Histopathology 2008; 53; 333-339.
7. Srigley JR, Amin MB, Epstein JI et al. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the prostate gland. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2006; 130; 936-946.
8. 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. 2005; 216(Suppl.); 34-63.
9. Epstein JI, Srigley J, Grignon D, Humphrey P. Recommendations for the reporting of prostate carcinoma. Hum. Pathol. 2007; 38; 1305-1309.
10. Sung MT, Cheng L. Contemporary approaches for processing and handling of radical prostactomy specimens. Histol. Histopathol. 2010; 25; 259-265.
11. Ohashi Y, Creek KE, Pirisi L, Kalus R, Young SR. RNA degradation in human breast tissue after surgical removal: a time-course study. Exp. Mol. Pathol. 2004; 77; 98-103.
12. Best S, Sawers Y, Fu VX, Almassi N, Huang W, Jarrard DF. Integrity of prostatic tissue for molecular analysis after robotic-assisted laparoscopic and open prostatectomy. Urology 2007; 70; 328-332.
13. Walton TJ, McCulloch TA, Rees RC, Bishop MC. Obtaining fresh prostate cancer tissue for research: a novel biopsy needle and sampling technique for radical prostatectomy specimens. Prostate 2005; 64; 382-386.
14. Egevad L, Engström K, Busch C. A new method for handling radical prostatectomies enabling fresh tissue harvesting, whole mount sections and landmarks for alignment of sections. J. Urol. Pathol. 1998; 9; 17-28.
15. Lexander H, Hellman U, Palmberg C et al. Evaluation of two sample preparation methods for prostate proteome analysis. Proteomics 2006; 6; 3918-3925.
16. Morrison C, Cheney R, Johnson CS, Smith G, Mohler JL. Central quadrant procurement of radical prostatectomy specimens. Prostate 2009; 69; 770-773.
17. Bertilsson H, Angelsen A, Viset T, Skogseth H, Tessem MB, Halgunset J. A new method to provide a fresh frozen prostate slice suitable for gene expression study and MR spectroscopy. Prostate 2011; 71; 461-469.
18. Steu S, Baucamp M, von Dach G et al. A procedure for tissue freezing and processing applicable to both intra-operative frozen section diagnosis and tissue banking in surgical pathology. Virchows Arch. 2008; 452; 305-312.
19. Start RD, Cross SS, Smith JH. Assessment of specimen fixation in a surgical pathology service. J. Clin. Pathol. 1992; 45; 546-547.
20. Start RD, Layton CM, Cross SS, Smith JH. Reassessment of the rate of fixative diffusion. J. Clin. Pathol. 1992; 45; 1120-1121.
21. Hoedemaeker RF, Ruijter ETG, Ruizeveld-de Winter JA, van der Kaa CA, van der Kwast TH. Processing radical prostatectomy specimens. J. Urol. Pathol. 1998; 9; 211-222.
22. Jonmarker S, Valdman A, Lindberg A, Hellstrom M, Egevad L. Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch. 2006; 449; 297-301.
23. Leong ASY, James CL, Thomas AC. Handbook of surgical pathology. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1996; 321.
24. Ruijter ET, Miller GJ, Aalders TW et al. Rapid microwave-stimulated fixation of entire prostatectomy specimens. Biomed-II MPC study group. J. Pathol. 1997; 183; 369-375.
25. Bussolati G, Annaratone L, Medico E, D'Armento G, Sapino A. Formalin fixation at low temperature better preserves nucleic acid integrity. PLoS ONE 2011; 6; e21043.
26. 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; 1775-1782.
27. 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; 129-132.
28. 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.
29. Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS et al. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2007; 178; 2385-2389; discussion 2389-2390.
30. Samaratunga H, Samaratunga D, Perry-Keene J, Adamson M, Yaxley J, Delahunt B. Distal seminal vesicle invasion by prostate adenocarcinoma does not occur in isolation of proximal seminal vesicle invasion or lymphovascular infiltration. Pathology 2010; 42; 330-333.
31. Epstein JI, Carmichael M, Walsh PC. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate invading the seminal vesicle: definition and relation of tumor volume, grade and margins of resection to prognosis. J. Urol. 1993; 149; 1040-1045.
32. Ohori M, Scardino PT, Lapin SL, Seale-Hawkins C, Link J, Wheeler TM. The mechanisms and prognostic significance of seminal vesicle involvement by prostate cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1993; 17; 1252-1261.
33. Sehdev AE, Pan CC, Epstein JI. Comparative analysis of sampling methods for grossing radical prostatectomy specimens performed for nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostatic adenocarcinoma. Hum. Pathol. 2001; 32; 494-499.
34. Hall GS, Kramer CE, Epstein JI. Evaluation of radical prostatectomy specimens. A comparative analysis of sampling methods. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1992; 1; 315-324.
35. True LD. Surgical pathology examination of the prostate gland. Practice survey by American society of clinical pathologists. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1994; 102; 572-579.
36. Vainer B, Toft BG, Olsen KE, Jacobsen GK, Marcussen N. Handling of radical prostatectomy specimens: total or partial embedding? Histopathology 2011; 58; 211-216.