Digital versus light microscopy assessment of surgical margin status after radical prostatectomy

被引:0
|
作者
Metka Volavšek
Ana Blanca
Rodolfo Montironi
Liang Cheng
Maria R. Raspollini
Nuno Vau
Jorge Fonseca
Francesco Pierconti
Antonio Lopez-Beltran
机构
[1] University of Ljubljana,Institute of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine
[2] Maimonides Biomedical Research Institute of Cordoba,Institute of Pathological Anatomy and Histopathology, School of Medicine
[3] Spain,Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine
[4] Polytechnic University of the Marche Region (Ancona),Department of Urology, School of Medicine
[5] United Hospitals,Histopathology and Molecular Diagnostics
[6] Indiana University,Division of Anatomic Pathology and Histology
[7] Indiana University,undefined
[8] University Hospital Careggi,undefined
[9] Urologic Oncology,undefined
[10] Champalimaud Clinical Center,undefined
[11] Urology Clinic,undefined
[12] Champalimaud Clinical Center,undefined
[13] Catholic University of the Sacred Heart,undefined
[14] “Agostino Gemelli” School of Medicine,undefined
[15] Department of Pathology,undefined
[16] Unit of Anatomical Pathology,undefined
[17] Department of Surgery,undefined
[18] Faculty of Medicine,undefined
[19] Champalimaud Clinical Center,undefined
来源
Virchows Archiv | 2018年 / 472卷
关键词
Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Surgical margin status; Digital microscopy; Digital pathology; Biochemical recurrence;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Positive surgical margin (PSM) extension reported as focal or non-focal/extensive is an important pathologic prognostic parameter after radical prostatectomy. Likewise, there is limited or no agreement on how to measure and what the best cut-off points to be used in practice are. We hypothesized that digital microscopy (DM) would potentially provide a more objective way to measure PSM and better define its clinical significance. To further our knowledge, we have evaluated PSM status in 107 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies using digital and conventional light microscopy (LM). DM evaluation detected three additional PSM cases, but no differences were seen (LM vs DM; p = 0.220). Mean linear measurement correlated to biochemical recurrence (BR) (LM, p = 0.002; DM, p = 0.001). ROC analysis identified a cut-off point to assess linear measurement by LM (3.5 mm) or DM (3.2 mm), but only digital measurement was significant for BR-free survival. Our study also evaluated a cut-off ≤ 3 mm that was associated to BR using LM (p = 0.023) or DM (p = 0.001). Finally, the number of paraffin blocks bearing PSM correlated with BR (p < 0.001) status with either LM or DM. In conclusion, DM produces similar data than LM but shows more accurate measurements. Reporting of PSM with score of ≤ 3 vs. > 3 mm linear extent using LM (3.2 mm if digital microscopy is applied) might represent an important prognostic feature after radical prostatectomy. Alternatively, reporting the number of blocks with PSM 1 vs. 2 or more might also provide important prognostic data in practice.
引用
收藏
页码:451 / 460
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Digital versus light microscopy assessment of surgical margin status after radical prostatectomy
    Volavsek, Metka
    Blanca, Ana
    Montironi, Rodolfo
    Cheng, Liang
    Raspollini, Maria R.
    Vau, Nuno
    Fonseca, Jorge
    Pierconti, Francesco
    Lopez-Beltran, Antonio
    VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 2018, 472 (03) : 451 - 460
  • [2] Surgical margin status after radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Khan, MA
    Partin, AW
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 95 (03) : 281 - 284
  • [3] Digital versus light microscopy assessment of extraprostatic extension in radical prostatectomy samples
    Volavsek, Metka
    Henriques, Vanessa
    Blanca, Ana
    Montironi, Rodolfo
    Cheng, Liang
    Raspollini, Maria R.
    Cimadamore, Alessia
    Vau, Nuno
    Pierconti, Francesco
    Lopez-Beltran, Antonio
    VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 2019, 475 (06) : 735 - 744
  • [4] Digital versus light microscopy assessment of extraprostatic extension in radical prostatectomy samples
    Metka Volavšek
    Vanessa Henriques
    Ana Blanca
    Rodolfo Montironi
    Liang Cheng
    Maria R. Raspollini
    Alessia Cimadamore
    Nuno Vau
    Francesco Pierconti
    Antonio Lopez-Beltran
    Virchows Archiv, 2019, 475 : 735 - 744
  • [5] Surgical margin status of open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy specimens
    Terakawa, Tomoaki
    Miyake, Hideaki
    Tanaka, Kazushi
    Takenaka, Atsushi
    Inoue, Taka-Aki
    Fujisawa, Masato
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2008, 15 (08) : 704 - 707
  • [6] Surgical margin status in European versus North American patients at radical prostatectomy
    Lewinshtein, DJ
    Chun, KHF
    Briganti, A
    Isbam, H
    Currlin, E
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2006, 175 (04): : 46 - 47
  • [7] Differences in urinary proteins related to surgical margin status after radical prostatectomy
    Heger, Zbynek
    Michalek, Petr
    Guran, Roman
    Cernei, Natalia
    Duskova, Katerina
    Vesely, Stepan
    Anyz, Jiri
    Stepankova, Olga
    Zitka, Ondrej
    Adam, Vojtech
    Kizek, Rene
    ONCOLOGY REPORTS, 2015, 34 (06) : 3247 - 3255
  • [8] Positive surgical margin status after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: a multicenter study
    Tafa, Ardit
    Grasso, Angelica
    Antonelli, Alessandro
    Bove, Pierluigi
    Celia, Antonio
    Ceruti, Carlo
    Crivellaro, Simone
    Falsaperla, Mario
    Minervini, Andrea
    Parma, Paolo
    Porreca, Angelo
    Zaramella, Stefano
    De Lorenzis, Elisa
    Cozzi, Gabriele
    Rocco, Bernardo
    UROLOGIA JOURNAL, 2015, 82 (04) : 229 - 237
  • [9] Intraoperative margin assessment during radical prostatectomy: is microscopy frozen in time or ready for digital defrost?
    Dinneen, Eoin
    Almeida-Magana, Ricardo
    Al-Hammouri, Tarek
    Fernandes, Iona
    Mayor, Nikhil
    Mendes, Larissa
    Winkler, Mathias
    Silvanto, Anna
    Haider, Aiman
    Freeman, Alex
    Shaw, Greg
    HISTOPATHOLOGY, 2024,
  • [10] Population-based comparison of surgical margin status for robotic versus open radical prostatectomy
    Hu, Jim C.
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Nguyen, Paul Linh
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    Shih, Ya-Chen T.
    Abdollah, Firas
    Chamie, Karim
    Wright, Jonathan L.
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Sun, Maxine
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (04)