Dataset Information

Partial versus complete prostatectomy specimen sampling: prospective non-inferiority study for pT3a tumours and surgical margin involvement.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The importance of additional information gained by complete versus partial sampling or prostatectomy specimens is uncertain. There is sparse data on the value of complete versus partial sampling and numbers of inclusions in studies are small and retrospective. We present the results of a prospective non-inferiority study to examine if partial sampling is inferior to complete sampling in terms of pathology outcomes and clinical relevance.

Methods

564 robot-assisted prostatectomy (RARP) specimens with prospective registration and analysis were collected over a 2-year period. All patients underwent RARP between January 2014 and February 2016 in our hospital after a diagnosis of clinically localised prostate cancer. For each patient, tumour stage and surgical margin status was recorded after partial and after complete sampling. Upstaging from pT2 to pT3a and upgrading from a negative-to-positive surgical margin was analysed.

Results

In 12 of 564 patients (2.1%), complete sampling yielded new information. In eight patients (1.4%), the surgical margin converted to positive after complete sampling. Upstaging from initial pT2 tumour in partial sampling to pT3a tumour after complete sampling was documented in five patients (0.9%). In the follow-up period (mean 35 months), a biochemical recurrence occurred in one patient.

Conclusions

Complete sampling provides new information in only 2.1% of cases, compared with partial sampling. We conclude that the additional information gained by complete sampling in terms of stage and surgical margin detection is statistically insignificant compared with partial sampling. Furthermore, partial sampling compared with complete sampling does not change postoperative clinical management.

SUBMITTER: Collette ERP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6500235 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Partial versus complete prostatectomy specimen sampling: prospective non-inferiority study for pT3a tumours and surgical margin involvement.

Collette Eelco R P ERP den Bakker Michael A MA Klaver Sjoerd O SO Vis André N AN Kliffen Mike M

BMJ open 20190411 4

<h4>Aims</h4>The importance of additional information gained by complete versus partial sampling or prostatectomy specimens is uncertain. There is sparse data on the value of complete versus partial sampling and numbers of inclusions in studies are small and retrospective. We present the results of a prospective non-inferiority study to examine if partial sampling is inferior to complete sampling in terms of pathology outcomes and clinical relevance.<h4>Methods</h4>564 robot-assisted prostatecto ...[more]

PMID: 30975668

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPositive surgical margins (PSM) in cancer patients are commonly associated with worse prognosis and a higher risk of secondary treatment. However, the relevance of this parameter in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial, given the inconsistencies in its ability to predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) and oncological outcomes. Hence, further assessment of the utility of surgical margins for prostate cancer prognosis is required to predict these outcomes more accurately. Over the last decade, studies have used the Gleason score (GS) of positive margins to predict outcomes. Herein, the authors aim to conduct a systematic review investigating the role of GS of PSM after radical prostatectomy in predicting BCR and oncological outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will perform a search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and COCHRANE databases. The review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We will screen titles and abstracts to select articles appropriate for full-text review. Studies discussing GS of PSM after RP will be included. Given the change in reporting of GS, only articles from 2005 to 2019 will be included. The quality of the studies chosen will be assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa tool for non-randomised and Cochrane risk of bias for randomised control studies. We will adopt the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation framework to comment on quality of cumulative evidence. The primary outcome measure will be time to BCR. Secondary outcome measures include secondary treatment, disease-specific survival, disease progression-free and overall mortality at follow-up period. We aim to perform a meta-analysis if the level of heterogeneity is acceptable (I2 <50%).Ethics and disseminationThe review does not require ethics approval as it is a review of published literature. The findings of the review will be submitted for peer-reviewed publications and presented at scientific meetings.Prospero registration numberCRD42019131800.

Dataset Information

Partial versus complete prostatectomy specimen sampling: prospective non-inferiority study for pT3a tumours and surgical margin involvement.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Partial versus complete prostatectomy specimen sampling: prospective non-inferiority study for pT3a tumours and surgical margin involvement.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets