Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy

Detailed pathological analysis and prognosis

Roger B. Watson, Francisco Civantos, Mark S. Soloway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

164 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives. To examine the extent and location of positive surgical margins and their influence on progression. Methods. Two hundred fifteen consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens, using 2 to 3-mm step-sections, were reviewed. Particular attention was paid to the location and extent of positive margins. Seventy-three patients (34%) with one or more positive margins were subjected to further detailed analysis. Progression was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level greater then 0.1 ng/mL and rising. The mean follow-up period was 23.2 months; median 24 months (range 3 to 40). Results. Margin-positive patients had a significantly higher biopsy tumor grade (P = 0.05) than did margin-negative patients. Capsular perforation was present in 75%, seminal vesicle invasion in 33%, and nodal metastases in 10% of margin-positive patients; in contrast, these tumor characteristics were present in 47%, 8%, and 1% of margin-negative patients, respectively. The extent of involvement of inked margins was focal in 22% and extensive in 66%. An equivocal positive margin identified as surgical incision into the specimen (due to hemostatic staples, surgical dissection, or retraction) was present in 12%. Seventy-one percent of patients had a positive margin at only one location. Of all 99 positive-margin locations, 40% were apical, 10% anterior, 8% bladder neck, 16% posterolateral, and 25% posterior. Thirty- four percent of margin-positive and 7% of margin-negative patients demonstrated biochemical progression. Of the 36 patients with a positive margin as their only major risk factor for progression (seminal vesicle and lymph node negative, Gleason score less than 8), 25% have progressed. Progression occurred in 2 of 9 patients with an equivocal positive margin, and 5 of 16 with a single focal-positive margin. A multivariate analysis of margin-positive patients identified tumor volume and grade as the most significant predictors of progression, with the location and extent of the positive margin not significant. Conclusions. Although more frequent at the prostatic apex, tumor at the inked margin at any location is a risk factor for postoperative biochemical progression.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)80-90
Number of pages11
JournalUrology
Volume48
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 1996

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Seminal Vesicles
Margins of Excision
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Grading
Hemostatics
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Tumor Burden
Sutures
Dissection
Urinary Bladder
Multivariate Analysis
Lymph Nodes
Neoplasm Metastasis
Biopsy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy : Detailed pathological analysis and prognosis. / Watson, Roger B.; Civantos, Francisco; Soloway, Mark S.

In: Urology, Vol. 48, No. 1, 01.07.1996, p. 80-90.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6704a360a03b4acbb2886abeb32a3285,
title = "Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy: Detailed pathological analysis and prognosis",
abstract = "Objectives. To examine the extent and location of positive surgical margins and their influence on progression. Methods. Two hundred fifteen consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens, using 2 to 3-mm step-sections, were reviewed. Particular attention was paid to the location and extent of positive margins. Seventy-three patients (34{\%}) with one or more positive margins were subjected to further detailed analysis. Progression was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level greater then 0.1 ng/mL and rising. The mean follow-up period was 23.2 months; median 24 months (range 3 to 40). Results. Margin-positive patients had a significantly higher biopsy tumor grade (P = 0.05) than did margin-negative patients. Capsular perforation was present in 75{\%}, seminal vesicle invasion in 33{\%}, and nodal metastases in 10{\%} of margin-positive patients; in contrast, these tumor characteristics were present in 47{\%}, 8{\%}, and 1{\%} of margin-negative patients, respectively. The extent of involvement of inked margins was focal in 22{\%} and extensive in 66{\%}. An equivocal positive margin identified as surgical incision into the specimen (due to hemostatic staples, surgical dissection, or retraction) was present in 12{\%}. Seventy-one percent of patients had a positive margin at only one location. Of all 99 positive-margin locations, 40{\%} were apical, 10{\%} anterior, 8{\%} bladder neck, 16{\%} posterolateral, and 25{\%} posterior. Thirty- four percent of margin-positive and 7{\%} of margin-negative patients demonstrated biochemical progression. Of the 36 patients with a positive margin as their only major risk factor for progression (seminal vesicle and lymph node negative, Gleason score less than 8), 25{\%} have progressed. Progression occurred in 2 of 9 patients with an equivocal positive margin, and 5 of 16 with a single focal-positive margin. A multivariate analysis of margin-positive patients identified tumor volume and grade as the most significant predictors of progression, with the location and extent of the positive margin not significant. Conclusions. Although more frequent at the prostatic apex, tumor at the inked margin at any location is a risk factor for postoperative biochemical progression.",
author = "Watson, {Roger B.} and Francisco Civantos and Soloway, {Mark S.}",
year = "1996",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00092-1",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "80--90",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Positive surgical margins with radical prostatectomy

T2 - Detailed pathological analysis and prognosis

AU - Watson, Roger B.

AU - Civantos, Francisco

AU - Soloway, Mark S.

PY - 1996/7/1

Y1 - 1996/7/1

N2 - Objectives. To examine the extent and location of positive surgical margins and their influence on progression. Methods. Two hundred fifteen consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens, using 2 to 3-mm step-sections, were reviewed. Particular attention was paid to the location and extent of positive margins. Seventy-three patients (34%) with one or more positive margins were subjected to further detailed analysis. Progression was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level greater then 0.1 ng/mL and rising. The mean follow-up period was 23.2 months; median 24 months (range 3 to 40). Results. Margin-positive patients had a significantly higher biopsy tumor grade (P = 0.05) than did margin-negative patients. Capsular perforation was present in 75%, seminal vesicle invasion in 33%, and nodal metastases in 10% of margin-positive patients; in contrast, these tumor characteristics were present in 47%, 8%, and 1% of margin-negative patients, respectively. The extent of involvement of inked margins was focal in 22% and extensive in 66%. An equivocal positive margin identified as surgical incision into the specimen (due to hemostatic staples, surgical dissection, or retraction) was present in 12%. Seventy-one percent of patients had a positive margin at only one location. Of all 99 positive-margin locations, 40% were apical, 10% anterior, 8% bladder neck, 16% posterolateral, and 25% posterior. Thirty- four percent of margin-positive and 7% of margin-negative patients demonstrated biochemical progression. Of the 36 patients with a positive margin as their only major risk factor for progression (seminal vesicle and lymph node negative, Gleason score less than 8), 25% have progressed. Progression occurred in 2 of 9 patients with an equivocal positive margin, and 5 of 16 with a single focal-positive margin. A multivariate analysis of margin-positive patients identified tumor volume and grade as the most significant predictors of progression, with the location and extent of the positive margin not significant. Conclusions. Although more frequent at the prostatic apex, tumor at the inked margin at any location is a risk factor for postoperative biochemical progression.

AB - Objectives. To examine the extent and location of positive surgical margins and their influence on progression. Methods. Two hundred fifteen consecutive radical prostatectomy specimens, using 2 to 3-mm step-sections, were reviewed. Particular attention was paid to the location and extent of positive margins. Seventy-three patients (34%) with one or more positive margins were subjected to further detailed analysis. Progression was defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen level greater then 0.1 ng/mL and rising. The mean follow-up period was 23.2 months; median 24 months (range 3 to 40). Results. Margin-positive patients had a significantly higher biopsy tumor grade (P = 0.05) than did margin-negative patients. Capsular perforation was present in 75%, seminal vesicle invasion in 33%, and nodal metastases in 10% of margin-positive patients; in contrast, these tumor characteristics were present in 47%, 8%, and 1% of margin-negative patients, respectively. The extent of involvement of inked margins was focal in 22% and extensive in 66%. An equivocal positive margin identified as surgical incision into the specimen (due to hemostatic staples, surgical dissection, or retraction) was present in 12%. Seventy-one percent of patients had a positive margin at only one location. Of all 99 positive-margin locations, 40% were apical, 10% anterior, 8% bladder neck, 16% posterolateral, and 25% posterior. Thirty- four percent of margin-positive and 7% of margin-negative patients demonstrated biochemical progression. Of the 36 patients with a positive margin as their only major risk factor for progression (seminal vesicle and lymph node negative, Gleason score less than 8), 25% have progressed. Progression occurred in 2 of 9 patients with an equivocal positive margin, and 5 of 16 with a single focal-positive margin. A multivariate analysis of margin-positive patients identified tumor volume and grade as the most significant predictors of progression, with the location and extent of the positive margin not significant. Conclusions. Although more frequent at the prostatic apex, tumor at the inked margin at any location is a risk factor for postoperative biochemical progression.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030200626&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030200626&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00092-1

DO - 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00092-1

M3 - Article

VL - 48

SP - 80

EP - 90

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 1

ER -