Prostate Pathology in Partial Versus Complete Submissions of Cystoprostatectomy Specimens
CUA Online Library. Wang P. 06/22/13; 31380; UP-01
CLICK HERE TO LOGIN
REGULAR CONTENT
REGULAR CONTENT
Login now to access Regular content available to all registered users.
Abstract
Rate & Comment (0)
Title
Prostate Pathology in Partial versus Complete Submissions of Cystoprostatectomy Specimens
Introduction
The incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) in cystoprostatectomy (CP) specimens is 25%. There are no guidelines for the pathological examination of prostates in CP specimens. In our institution, prior to 2000, the prostates were partially submitted whereas currently all prostates are completely submitted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, pathological features and clinical outcomes of patients with PCa found on CP specimens with partial versus complete submission.
Methods
CP specimens with incidental PCa were identified from our archives between 1990 to 2006. Patients with known metastatic PCa, previous radiotherapy or partial prostatectomy were excluded. A total of 72 patients were found, 51 (complete group) had CP specimens that underwent complete submission versus 21 (partial group) that were partially submitted. Clinical outcomes were retrospectively collected via paper and electronic charts. Each CP specimen was retrieved and reviewed by the pathology department. Clinically significant PCa was defined as: Gleason score > 7, seminal vesical invasion, extraprostatic extension (EPE) and positive surgical margins. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t-test, Fisher's exact test and the Kaplan-Meier method. Significance was set at <0.05.
Results
Patient demographics between the two groups were similar. Median follow-up for the partial and complete group were 65.7 and 72.9 months respectively. There was a total of 40 (55.5%) clinically significant PCa, of these 13 were in the partial group versus 27 in the complete group. Positive surgical margins at the apex was found in 7% of specimens. EPE was found in 2 versus 11 specimens in the partial and complete group respectively. Invasive urothelial carcinoma was found in 7 specimens in the partial group versus 11 in the complete group. There was one death from metastatic PCa in the complete group and none in the partial group. There was no significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups (Figure 1).
Conclusions
This study comparing partial versus complete submission of the prostates in CP specimens showed no significant differences in the detection of clinically significant PCa or survival. Limitations of this study include the bias of a retrospective study, small sample size, and short follow-up.
Prostate Pathology in Partial versus Complete Submissions of Cystoprostatectomy Specimens
Introduction
The incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) in cystoprostatectomy (CP) specimens is 25%. There are no guidelines for the pathological examination of prostates in CP specimens. In our institution, prior to 2000, the prostates were partially submitted whereas currently all prostates are completely submitted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, pathological features and clinical outcomes of patients with PCa found on CP specimens with partial versus complete submission.
Methods
CP specimens with incidental PCa were identified from our archives between 1990 to 2006. Patients with known metastatic PCa, previous radiotherapy or partial prostatectomy were excluded. A total of 72 patients were found, 51 (complete group) had CP specimens that underwent complete submission versus 21 (partial group) that were partially submitted. Clinical outcomes were retrospectively collected via paper and electronic charts. Each CP specimen was retrieved and reviewed by the pathology department. Clinically significant PCa was defined as: Gleason score > 7, seminal vesical invasion, extraprostatic extension (EPE) and positive surgical margins. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t-test, Fisher's exact test and the Kaplan-Meier method. Significance was set at <0.05.
Results
Patient demographics between the two groups were similar. Median follow-up for the partial and complete group were 65.7 and 72.9 months respectively. There was a total of 40 (55.5%) clinically significant PCa, of these 13 were in the partial group versus 27 in the complete group. Positive surgical margins at the apex was found in 7% of specimens. EPE was found in 2 versus 11 specimens in the partial and complete group respectively. Invasive urothelial carcinoma was found in 7 specimens in the partial group versus 11 in the complete group. There was one death from metastatic PCa in the complete group and none in the partial group. There was no significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups (Figure 1).
Conclusions
This study comparing partial versus complete submission of the prostates in CP specimens showed no significant differences in the detection of clinically significant PCa or survival. Limitations of this study include the bias of a retrospective study, small sample size, and short follow-up.
Title
Prostate Pathology in Partial versus Complete Submissions of Cystoprostatectomy Specimens
Introduction
The incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) in cystoprostatectomy (CP) specimens is 25%. There are no guidelines for the pathological examination of prostates in CP specimens. In our institution, prior to 2000, the prostates were partially submitted whereas currently all prostates are completely submitted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, pathological features and clinical outcomes of patients with PCa found on CP specimens with partial versus complete submission.
Methods
CP specimens with incidental PCa were identified from our archives between 1990 to 2006. Patients with known metastatic PCa, previous radiotherapy or partial prostatectomy were excluded. A total of 72 patients were found, 51 (complete group) had CP specimens that underwent complete submission versus 21 (partial group) that were partially submitted. Clinical outcomes were retrospectively collected via paper and electronic charts. Each CP specimen was retrieved and reviewed by the pathology department. Clinically significant PCa was defined as: Gleason score > 7, seminal vesical invasion, extraprostatic extension (EPE) and positive surgical margins. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t-test, Fisher's exact test and the Kaplan-Meier method. Significance was set at <0.05.
Results
Patient demographics between the two groups were similar. Median follow-up for the partial and complete group were 65.7 and 72.9 months respectively. There was a total of 40 (55.5%) clinically significant PCa, of these 13 were in the partial group versus 27 in the complete group. Positive surgical margins at the apex was found in 7% of specimens. EPE was found in 2 versus 11 specimens in the partial and complete group respectively. Invasive urothelial carcinoma was found in 7 specimens in the partial group versus 11 in the complete group. There was one death from metastatic PCa in the complete group and none in the partial group. There was no significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups (Figure 1).
Conclusions
This study comparing partial versus complete submission of the prostates in CP specimens showed no significant differences in the detection of clinically significant PCa or survival. Limitations of this study include the bias of a retrospective study, small sample size, and short follow-up.
Prostate Pathology in Partial versus Complete Submissions of Cystoprostatectomy Specimens
Introduction
The incidence of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) in cystoprostatectomy (CP) specimens is 25%. There are no guidelines for the pathological examination of prostates in CP specimens. In our institution, prior to 2000, the prostates were partially submitted whereas currently all prostates are completely submitted. The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, pathological features and clinical outcomes of patients with PCa found on CP specimens with partial versus complete submission.
Methods
CP specimens with incidental PCa were identified from our archives between 1990 to 2006. Patients with known metastatic PCa, previous radiotherapy or partial prostatectomy were excluded. A total of 72 patients were found, 51 (complete group) had CP specimens that underwent complete submission versus 21 (partial group) that were partially submitted. Clinical outcomes were retrospectively collected via paper and electronic charts. Each CP specimen was retrieved and reviewed by the pathology department. Clinically significant PCa was defined as: Gleason score > 7, seminal vesical invasion, extraprostatic extension (EPE) and positive surgical margins. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t-test, Fisher's exact test and the Kaplan-Meier method. Significance was set at <0.05.
Results
Patient demographics between the two groups were similar. Median follow-up for the partial and complete group were 65.7 and 72.9 months respectively. There was a total of 40 (55.5%) clinically significant PCa, of these 13 were in the partial group versus 27 in the complete group. Positive surgical margins at the apex was found in 7% of specimens. EPE was found in 2 versus 11 specimens in the partial and complete group respectively. Invasive urothelial carcinoma was found in 7 specimens in the partial group versus 11 in the complete group. There was one death from metastatic PCa in the complete group and none in the partial group. There was no significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups (Figure 1).
Conclusions
This study comparing partial versus complete submission of the prostates in CP specimens showed no significant differences in the detection of clinically significant PCa or survival. Limitations of this study include the bias of a retrospective study, small sample size, and short follow-up.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}