MP56-11 PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF FOCAL POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized III1 Apr 2015MP56-11 PROGNOSTIC VALUE OF FOCAL POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY Ki Bom Kim, In jae Lee, Tae jin Kim, Jong Jin Oh, Sangchul Lee, Seong-Jin Jeong, Sung Kyu Hong, Seok-Soo Byun, Choong Hee Noh, and Sang Eun Lee Ki Bom KimKi Bom Kim More articles by this author , In jae LeeIn jae Lee More articles by this author , Tae jin KimTae jin Kim More articles by this author , Jong Jin OhJong Jin Oh More articles by this author , Sangchul LeeSangchul Lee More articles by this author , Seong-Jin JeongSeong-Jin Jeong More articles by this author , Sung Kyu HongSung Kyu Hong More articles by this author , Seok-Soo ByunSeok-Soo Byun More articles by this author , Choong Hee NohChoong Hee Noh More articles by this author , and Sang Eun LeeSang Eun Lee More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.2075AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The significance of focal positive margins (FPM) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is unclear. The implication is that FPM are surgically induced, may not represent true tumor extension beyond the prostate, and thus may not affect biochemical recurrence (BCR) free survival. Our objective is investigating the prognostic value of FPM in radical prostatectomy patients, especially in pathologic T2 patients. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data prospectively collected between December 2003 and July 2014 in 2291 consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RP at SNUBH in South Korea. Patients who received neo-adjuvant or adjuvant therapy were excluded and follow-up length less than 12 months were also excluded, leaving 1733 patients for analysis. Positive surgical margins were characterized as focal positive margin (≤3 mm in length) or non-focal positive margin (>3 mm in length). Patients were grouped as negative margin (NM), focal positive margin (FPM), non -focal single positive surgical margin (NFSPM), and non-focal multiple positive margin (NFMPM). A multivariate Cox analysis was performed to evaluate the significance of FPM in patients with prostate cancer. RESULTS Of all patients, 1260 (72.7%) had NM, 114 (6.6%) had FPM, 218 (12.6%) had NFSPM, and 141 (8.1%) had NFMPM. Of the 1264 patients with pT2 disease, 1065 (84.3%) had NM, 62 (4.9%) had FPM, 104 (8.2%) had NFSPM, and 33 (2.6%) had NFMPM. The 5-year BCR free survival for all patients was 90%, 83.4%, 62.9%, 54.4% for NM, FPM, NFSPM, and NFMPM, respectively (P<0.001). The 5-year BCR free survival for organ confined disease was 93.1%, 90.6%, 79.5%, 58.8% for NM, FPM, NFSPM, and NFMPM, respectively (P<0.001). On multivariate analysis of all patients, FPM doesn't significantly affect BCR free survival (p=0.458). Similarly, there is no significant difference in those with pathologic T2 patients. (p=0.512). CONCLUSIONS There is no significant difference in BCR between those patients with negative margin and focal positive margin after radical prostatectomy. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e685 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Ki Bom Kim More articles by this author In jae Lee More articles by this author Tae jin Kim More articles by this author Jong Jin Oh More articles by this author Sangchul Lee More articles by this author Seong-Jin Jeong More articles by this author Sung Kyu Hong More articles by this author Seok-Soo Byun More articles by this author Choong Hee Noh More articles by this author Sang Eun Lee More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...