Preoperative factors predictive of posterolateral extracapsular extension after radical prostatectomy

Korean Journal of Urology

Volumn 54, Issue 12, 2013, Pages 824-829

  Pak, Sahyun ^a   Park, Sejun ^b   Ryu, Jeman ^a   Hong, Sungwoo ^c   Song, Sang Hoon ^a   You, Dalsan ^a   Jeong, In Gab ^a   Song, Cheryn ^a   Hong, Jun Hyuk ^a   Kim, Choung Soo ^a   Ahn, Hanjong ^a  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^c Dankook University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; ARTICLE; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSTEROLATERAL EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSTATE TUMOR; PROSTATECTOMY; SCORING SYSTEM; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 84890331858     PISSN: 20056737     EISSN: 20056745     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4111/kju.2013.54.12.824     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Jung KW, Park S, Won YJ, Kong HJ, Lee JY, Seo HG, et al. Prediction of cancer incidence and mortality in Korea, 2012. Cancer Res Treat 2012;44:25-31.
2. Chi BH, Chang IH. Prostate cancer: recent trends in Korea. Urol Int 2010;85:88-93.
3. Quinlan DM, Epstein JI, Carter BS, Walsh PC. Sexual function following radical prostatectomy: influence of preservation of neurovascular bundles. J Urol 1991;145:998-1002.
4. Berryhill R Jr, Jhaveri J, Yadav R, Leung R, Rao S, El-Hakim A, et al. Robotic prostatectomy: a review of outcomes compared with laparoscopic and open approaches. Urology 2008;72:15-23.
5. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano A, Graefen M, et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 2009;55:1037-63.
6. Raina R, Agarwal A, Zippe CD. Management of erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2005;66:923-9.
7. Catalona WJ, Bigg SW. Nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: evaluation of results after 250 patients. J Urol 1990;143:538-43.
8. Blute ML, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ, Slezak JM, Martin SK, Amling CL, et al. Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organ-confined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1997;50:733-9.
9. Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M, Serio AM, Gorbonos A, Maru N, et al. Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2007;70:965-9.
10. Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Cagiannos I, Stricker PD, Klein E, et al. Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 2005;66:1245-50.
11. Katz R, Salomon L, Hoznek A, de la Taille A, Antiphon P, Abbou CC. Positive surgical margins in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the impact of apical dissection, bladder neck remodeling and nerve preservation. J Urol 2003;169:2049-52.
12. Nelles JL, Freedland SJ, Presti JC Jr, Terris MK, Aronson WJ, Amling CL, et al. Impact of nerve sparing on surgical margins and biochemical recurrence: results from the SEARCH database. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2009;12:172-6.
13. Palisaar RJ, Noldus J, Graefen M, Erbersdobler A, Haese A, Huland H. Influence of nerve-sparing (NS) procedure during radical prostatectomy (RP) on margin status and biochemical failure. Eur Urol 2005;47:176-84.
14. Sofer M, Hamilton-Nelson KL, Civantos F, Soloway MS. Positive surgical margins after radical retropubic prostatectomy: the influence of site and number on progression. J Urol 2002;167:2453-6.
15. 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(4 Pt 1):1328-32.
16. Liss M, Osann K, Ornstein D. Positive surgical margins during robotic radical prostatectomy: a contemporary analysis of risk factors. BJU Int 2008;102:603-8.
17. Potdevin L, Ercolani M, Jeong J, Kim IY. Functional and oncologic outcomes comparing interfascial and intrafascial nerve sparing in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. J Endourol 2009;23:1479-84.
18. Shikanov S, Woo J, Al-Ahmadie H, Katz MH, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL, et al. Extrafascial versus interfascial nerve-sparing technique for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparison of functional outcomes and positive surgical margins characteristics. Urology 2009;74:611-6
19. Smith JA Jr, Chan RC, Chang SS, Herrell SD, Clark PE, Baumgartner R, 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;178:2385-9.
20. Graefen M, Haese A, Pichlmeier U, Hammerer PG, Noldus J, Butz K, et al. A validated strategy for side specific prediction of organ confined prostate cancer: a tool to select for nerve sparing radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2001;165:857-63.
21. Shah O, Robbins DA, Melamed J, Lepor H. The New York University nerve sparing algorithm decreases the rate of positive surgical margins following radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2003;169:2147-52.
22. Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Huang MW, Robinson BD, Shevchuk MM, Durand M, et al. Anatomical grades of nerve sparing: a risk-stratified approach to neural-hammock sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int 2011;108(6 Pt 2):984-92.
23. Tsuzuki T, Hernandez DJ, Aydin H, Trock B, Walsh PC, Epstein JI. Prediction of extraprostatic extension in the neurovascular bundle based on prostate needle biopsy pathology, serum prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination. J Urol 2005;173: 450-3.
24. Stephenson AJ, Wood DP, Kattan MW, Klein EA, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, et al. Location, extent and number of positive surgical margins do not improve accuracy of predicting prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2009;182:1357-63.
25. Lepor H, Tareen B. Neurovascular bundle resection: does it improve the margins? Urol Oncol 2010;28:215-8.
26. McClure TD, Margolis DJ, Reiter RE, Sayre JW, Thomas MA, Nagarajan R, et al. Use of MR imaging to determine preservation of the neurovascular bundles at robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Radiology 2012;262:874-83.
27. Bloch BN, Furman-Haran E, Helbich TH, Lenkinski RE, Degani H, Kratzik C, et al. Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging: initial results. Radiology 2007;245:176-85.
28. Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Chen HN, Scardino PT, Kuroiwa K. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology 2006;238:597-603.