Urologia Internationalis · 2011 · 10 citations · 16 references
MedicineSurgeryUrologyHistologyHistopathologySurgical PathologyProstate BiopsyProstate CancerProstate PathologyProstate SurgeryProstatic PathologyRadical ProstatectomyHistopathological EvaluationHistopathological GradingPositive Surgical MarginsProstate Cancer HistopathologyRobot-assisted Radical ProstatectomyRobotic ProstatectomyRobotic-assisted Radical ProstatectomySurgical Margin Evaluation
INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of data investigating the relationship between histopathological variables of oncologic importance and prostate volume, and we aimed to investigate this. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 2,207 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy were studied. Preoperative demographic and both pre- and postoperative histopathological parameters were compared among the small (<40 cm(3)), intermediate (40-70 cm(3)), and large (>70 cm(3)) prostate groups. RESULTS: Patients with smaller prostates were younger, had slightly lower BMIs, and lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels than those with larger prostates (p < 0.001). They also had worse histopathological criteria (Gleason, core positivity, and maximum percent cancer) on preoperative biopsy and had worse radical specimen Gleason sums (p < 0.001), percent cancer (p < 0.001), and pathological stage (p = 0.016). 11.5% of the men in the small prostate group suffered a positive surgical margin (PSM) compared to 8.3 and 5.6% in the intermediate and large prostate groups, respectively (p = 0.008). Basilar, posterolateral, and multifocal PSMs were commoner in the small prostate group. CONCLUSIONS: Younger men have smaller prostates and worse preoperative histopathological parameters despite lower PSA values. Men with small prostates undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy have worse final Gleason sums, tumour volume, extraprostatic extension, and PSM rates than those with larger prostates.
16
Ahmedin Jemal, Rebecca L. Siegel, Elizabeth M. Ward et al. · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · 2006 · 5.3K citations · Full text