Journal article
Pathologic comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens
Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), Vol.62(3), pp.481-486
2003
DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00387-X
PMID: 12946751
Abstract
To compare the pathologic evaluation of 60 sequential laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) specimens with 60 sequential and 60 stage and grade-matched open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) cohort specimens.
Of 68 patients undergoing LRP, 3 requiring open conversion and 5 receiving neoadjuvant hormonal therapy were excluded, leaving 60 for analysis. Among 72 sequential open RRP specimens, 60 from patients not receiving neoadjuvant hormonal therapy and without nodal metastases were analyzed. A third cohort of 60 RRP specimens matched with the LRP specimens for clinical stage and biopsy grade was also evaluated.
The specimen weight and preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen level were similar for each cohort, and approximately 75% of patients from each cohort were clinical Stage T1c. Forty-six LRP and matched open RRP (76.7%) and 39 sequential open RRP (65%) specimens were biopsy Gleason sum 6, and the remainder were primarily Gleason sum 7. The pathologic grade and stage distribution were similar for each cohort. Ten LRP (16.9%) and 12 open RRP (20%) specimens from each cohort had positive inked margins (
P > 0.10). Positive apex margins were noted in 3, 7, and 7 and multiple positive margin sites in 0, 5, and 6 of the LRP, matched open RRP, and sequential open RRP specimens (
P < 0.05), respectively.
Pathologic evaluation of the LRP and open RRP specimens from patients not receiving neoadjuvant hormonal therapy demonstrated similar overall positive margin rates, but LRP had a lower rate of apex and multiple-site positive margins.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- Pathologic comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy specimens
- Creators
- James A Brown - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAChristopher Garlitz - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USALeonard G Gomella - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAScott G Hubosky - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAStuart M Diamond - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USADavid McGinnis - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAStephen E Strup - Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Publication Details
- Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), Vol.62(3), pp.481-486
- Publisher
- Elsevier Inc
- DOI
- 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00387-X
- PMID
- 12946751
- ISSN
- 0090-4295
- eISSN
- 1527-9995
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 2003
- Academic Unit
- Roy J. Carver Department of Biomedical Engineering; Urology
- Record Identifier
- 9984051780902771
Metrics
13 Record Views