Total submission of pelvic lymphadenectomy tissues removed during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer increases lymph node yield and detection of micrometastases

Histopathology

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 399-404

  Perry Keene, Joanna ^a,b   Ferguson, Peter ^c,d   Samaratunga, Hemamali ^a   Nacey, John N ^d   Delahunt, Brett ^d  

^a Aquesta Pathology   (Australia)

^b ROYAL BRISBANE AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c MALAGHAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH   (New Zealand)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Lymph nodes; Lymphadenectomy; Metastasis; Prognosis; Prostate adenocarcinoma; Radical prostatectomy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SURGERY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MICROMETASTASIS; PELVIS LYMPH NODE; PELVIS LYMPHADENECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE ADENOCARCINOMA; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; TISSUE SECTION;

LYMPH NODES; LYMPHADENECTOMY; METASTASIS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE ADENOCARCINOMA; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY;

ADENOCARCINOMA; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM MICROMETASTASIS; PELVIS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84892443555     PISSN: 03090167     EISSN: 13652559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/his.12262     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Heidenreich A, Ohlmann CH, Polyakov S. Anatomical extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 2007; 52; 29-37.
2. Barth PJ, Gerharz EW, Ramaswamy A, Riedmiller H. The influence of lymph node counts on the detection of pelvic lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer. Pathol. Res. Pract. 1999; 195; 633-636.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC, Amin MB, ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2005; 29; 1228-1242.
6. Whittemore DE, Hick EJ, Carter MR et al. Significance of tertiary Gleason pattern 5 in Gleason score 7 radical prostatectomy specimens. J. Urol. 2008; 179; 516-522.
7. Pan CC, Potter SR, Partin AW, Epstein JI. The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2000; 24; 563-569.
8. Da Pozzo LF, Cozzarini C, Briganti A et al. Long-term follow-up of patients with prostate cancer and nodal metastases treated by pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical prostatectomy: the positive impact of adjuvant radiotherapy. Eur. Urol. 2009; 55; 1003-1011.
9. Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Siddiqui S et al. Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J. Urol. 2007; 178; 864-871.
10. Lawton CA, Winter K, Grignon D, Pilepich MV. Androgen suppression plus radiation versus radiation alone for patients with stage D1/pathologic node-positive adenocarcinoma of the prostate: updated results based on national prospective randomized trial Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 85-31. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005; 23; 800-807.
11. Messing EM, Manola J, Sarosdy M et al. Immediate hormonal therapy compared with observation after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with node-positive prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1999; 341; 1781-1788.
12. Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J et al. Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2006; 7; 472-479.
13. Hövels AM, Heesakkers RAM, Adang EM et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin. Radiol. 2008; 63; 387-395.
14. Heidenreich A, Varga Z, von Knobloch R. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J. Urol. 2002; 167; 1681-1686.
15. Créhange G, Chen CP, Hsu CC et al. Management of prostate cancer patients with lymph node involvement: a rapidly evolving paradigm. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2012; 38; 956-967.
16. Catalona WJ, Smith DS. Cancer recurrence and survival rates after anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer: intermediate-term results. J. Urol. 1998; 160; 2428-2434.
17. Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Cancer control and quality of life following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy: results at 10 years. J. Urol. 1994; 152; 1831-1836.
18. Okegawa T, Nutahara K, Higashihara E. Detection of micrometastatic prostate cancer cells in the lymph nodes by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction is predictive of biochemical recurrence in pathological stage T2 prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2000; 163; 1183-1188.
19. Miyake H, Kurahashi T, Hara I, Takenaka A, Fujisawa M. Significance of micrometastases in pelvic lymph nodes detected by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy after neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. BJU Int. 2007; 99; 315-320.
20. Schostak M, Krause H, Miller K et al. Does the molecular staging in pelvic lymph nodes improve the detection of relevant prostate cancer metastases? An assessment after 6 years. BJU Int. 2007; 99; 1409-1414.
21. Godoy G, von Bodman C, Chade DC et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: frequency and distribution of nodal metastases in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series. J. Urol. 2012; 187; 2082-2086.
22. Gordetsky J, Scosyrev E, Rashid H et al. Identifying additional lymph nodes in radical cystectomy lymphadenectomy specimens. Mod. Pathol. 2012; 25; 140-144.
23. Briganti A, Chun FK-H, Salonia A et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion based on the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2006; 98; 788-793.
24. Mazzola C, Savage C, Ahallal Y et al. Nodal counts during pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: an objective indicator of quality under the influence of very subjective factors. BJU Int. 2012; 109; 1323-1328.
25. Alagiri M, Colton MD, Seidmon EJ, Greenberg RE, Hanno PM. The staging pelvic lymphadenectomy: implications as an adjunctive procedure for clinically localized prostate cancer. Br. J. Urol. 1997; 80; 243-246.
26. Stone NN, Stock RG, Unger P. Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: comparison of the extended and modified techniques. J. Urol. 1997; 158; 1891-1894.
27. Allaf ME, Palapattu GS, Trock BJ, Carter HB, Walsh PC. Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2004; 172; 1840-1844.
28. Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE. Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J. Urol. 2003; 169; 849-854.
29. Weingärtner K, Ramaswamy A, Bittinger A et al. Anatomical basis for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: results of an autopsy study and implications for the clinic. J. Urol. 1996; 156; 1969-1971.
30. Abdollah F, Sun M, Thuret R et al. Lymph node count threshold for optimal pelvic lymph node staging in prostate cancer. Int. J. Urol. 2012; 19; 645-651.
31. Briganti A, Chun FK-H, Salonia A et al. Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 2006; 50; 1006-1013.
32. Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MS et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2003; 169; 145-148.