Evaluation of margins during radical prostatectomy: confocal microscopy vs frozen section analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Musi, Gennaro [1 ,6 ]
Mistretta, Francesco A. [1 ,6 ]
Ivanova, Mariia [2 ]
de Cobelli, Ottavio [1 ,6 ]
Bellin, Andrea [1 ]
Vago, Gianluca Gaetano [6 ]
Pravettoni, Gabriella [3 ,6 ]
Pala, Oriana [2 ]
Lepanto, Daniela [2 ]
Bottero, Danilo [1 ]
Piccinelli, Mattia Luca [1 ]
Tallini, Matteo [1 ]
Marvaso, Giulia [5 ,6 ]
Ferro, Matteo [1 ]
Petralia, Giuseppe [4 ,6 ]
Jereczek-Fossa, Barbara Alicja [5 ,6 ]
Fusco, Nicola [2 ,6 ]
Renne, Giuseppe [2 ]
Luzzago, Stefano [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] European Inst Oncol IEO, IRCCS, Dept Urol, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti 435, I-20141 Milan, Italy
[2] European Inst Oncol IEO, IRCCS, Div Pathol, Milan, Italy
[3] European Inst Oncol IEO, IRCCS, Appl Res Div Cognit & Psychol Sci, Milan, Italy
[4] European Inst Oncol IEO, IRCCS, Dept Med Imaging & Radiat Sci, Precis Imaging & Res Unit, Milan, Italy
[5] European Inst Oncol IEO, IRCCS, Dept Radiat Oncol, Milan, Italy
[6] Univ Milan, Dept Oncol & Hematol Oncol, Milan, Italy
关键词
prostate cancer; fluorescence confocal microscopy; prostate margins; frozen section; radical prostatectomy; POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS; PATHOLOGY;
D O I
10.1111/bju.16441
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives To test the performance of ex vivo fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM; Vivascope 2500M-G4), as compared to intra-operative frozen section (IFS) analysis, to evaluate surgical margins during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), with final pathology as the reference standard. Methods Overall, 54 margins in 45 patients treated with RARP were analysed with: (1) ex vivo FCM; (2) IFS analysis; and (3) final pathology. FCM margins were evaluated by two different pathologists (experienced [M.I.: 10 years] vs highly experienced [G.R.: >30 years]) as strongly negative, probably negative, doubtful, probably positive, or strongly positive. First, inter-observer agreement (Cohen's kappa) between pathologists was tested. Second, we reported the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of ex vivo FCM. Finally, agreement between ex vivo FCM and IFS analysis (Cohen's kappa) was reported. For all analyses, four combinations of FCM results were evaluated. Results At ex vivo FCM, the inter-observer agreement between pathologists ranged from moderate (kappa = 0.74) to almost perfect (kappa = 0.90), according to the four categories of results. Indeed, at ex vivo FCM, the highly experienced pathologist reached the best balance between sensitivity (70.5%) specificity (91.8%), PPV (80.0%) and NPV (87.1%). Conversely, on IFS analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were, respectively, 88.2% vs 100% vs 100% vs 94.8%. The agreement between the ex vivo FCM and IFS analyses ranged from moderate (kappa = 0.62) to strong (kappa = 0.86), according to the four categories of results. Conclusion Evaluation of prostate margins at ex vivo FCM appears to be feasible and reliable. The agreement between readers encourages its widespread use in daily practice. Nevertheless, as of today, the performance of FCM seems to be sub-par when compared to the established standard of care (IFS analysis).
引用
收藏
页码:773 / 780
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Identification of Grossing Criteria for Intraoperative Evaluation by Frozen Section of Lung Cancer Resection Margins
    Gagne, Andreanne
    Racine, Etienne
    Orain, Michele
    Meziou, Salma
    Simard, Serge
    Couture, Christian
    Page, Sylvain
    Trahan, Sylvain
    Ugalde, Paula
    Lacasse, Yves
    Joubert, David
    Joubert, Philippe
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2018, 42 (11) : 1495 - 1502
  • [42] Potential pitfalls in the frozen section evaluation of parenchymal margins in nephron-sparing surgery
    McHale, T
    Malkowicz, SB
    Tomaszewski, JE
    Genega, EM
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2002, 118 (06) : 903 - 910
  • [43] Interobserver Variability and Challenges in Intraoperative Frozen Section Evaluation of Pancreatic Margins in Pancreatectomy Specimens
    Dhingra, Sadhna
    Taggart, Melissa W.
    Foo, Wai Chin
    Rashid, Asif
    Heredia, Maria Luisa Machado
    May, Sarah B.
    Van Buren II, George
    Fisher, William E.
    Wang, Huamin
    ANNALS OF CLINICAL AND LABORATORY SCIENCE, 2023, 53 (06) : 847 - 860
  • [44] Does intraoperative frozen section really predict significant positive surgical margins after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy? A retrospective study
    Choi, Se Young
    Chi, Byung Hoon
    Kim, Tae-Hyoung
    Lim, Bumjin
    Lee, Wonchul
    You, Dalsan
    Kim, Choung-Soo
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY, 2021, 23 (01) : 74 - 79
  • [45] Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection with Ultrasound Real-Time Elastography: A Comparison with Step Section Pathological Analysis after Radical Prostatectomy
    Salomon, Georg
    Koellermann, Jens
    Thederan, Imke
    Chun, Felix K. H.
    Budaeus, Lars
    Schlomm, Thorsten
    Isbarn, Hendrik
    Heinzer, Hans
    Huland, Hartwig
    Graefen, Markus
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2008, 54 (06) : 1354 - 1362
  • [46] Can TRUS guidance reduce the incidence of positive margins during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy? Commentary
    Guillonneau, Bertrand
    NATURE CLINICAL PRACTICE UROLOGY, 2006, 3 (10): : 518 - 519
  • [47] Intraoperative radiotherapy during radical prostatectomy for intermediate-risk to locally advanced prostate cancer: treatment technique and evaluation of perioperative and functional outcome vs standard radical prostatectomy, in a matched-pair analysis
    Rocco, Bernardo
    Jereczek-Fossa, Barbara A.
    Matei, Deliu-Victor
    Verweij, Fabrizio
    Santoro, Luigi
    Vavassori, Andrea
    Ospina, Juan Camillo
    Cedeira, Francisco
    Ciocca, Mario
    Orecchia, Roberto
    de Cobelli, Ottavio
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2009, 104 (11) : 1624 - 1630
  • [48] Intraoperative Digital Analysis of Ablation Margins (DAAM) by Fluorescent Confocal Microscopy to Improve Partial Prostate Gland Cryoablation Outcomes
    Selvaggio, Oscar
    Falagario, Ugo Giovanni
    Bruno, Salvatore Mariano
    Recchia, Marco
    Sighinolfi, Maria Chiara
    Sanguedolce, Francesca
    Milillo, Paola
    Macarini, Luca
    Rastinehad, Ardeshir R.
    Sanchez-Salas, Rafael
    Barret, Eric
    Lugnani, Franco
    Rocco, Bernardo
    Cormio, Luigi
    Carrieri, Giuseppe
    CANCERS, 2021, 13 (17)
  • [49] Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs the standard approach: a systematic review and analysis of comparative outcomes
    Checcucci, Enrico
    Veccia, Alessandro
    Fiori, Cristian
    Amparore, Daniele
    Manfredi, Matteo
    Di Dio, Michele
    Morra, Ivano
    Galfano, Antonio
    Autorino, Riccardo
    Bocciardi, Aldo Massimo
    Dasgupta, Prokar
    Porpiglia, Francesco
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 125 (01) : 8 - 16
  • [50] Neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE) during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
    Ditonno, Francesco
    Bologna, Eugenio
    Licari, Leslie Claire
    Franco, Antonio
    Cannoletta, Donato
    Checcucci, Enrico
    Veccia, Alessandro
    Bertolo, Riccardo
    Crivellaro, Simone
    Porpiglia, Francesco
    De Nunzio, Cosimo
    Antonelli, Alessandro
    Autorino, Riccardo
    PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, 2024,