Cargando…

Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning

BACKGROUND: The minimum volume standard is 100 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) procedures per hospital in the Netherlands, so patients have to be referred to high-volume surgical centers for RARP. During preoperative work-up, prostate biopsies taken elsewhere are reassessed, with upgradi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoekstra, Robert J., Goossens, Ward J.H., Beulens, Alexander, van Herk, Hilde, Hoevenaars, Brigiet M., de Baaij, Joost, Somford, Diederik M., Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel, van Basten, Jean-Paul A., Vrijhof, H.J. Eric J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8317876/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34337523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.04.003
_version_ 1783730138110754816
author Hoekstra, Robert J.
Goossens, Ward J.H.
Beulens, Alexander
van Herk, Hilde
Hoevenaars, Brigiet M.
de Baaij, Joost
Somford, Diederik M.
Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel
van Basten, Jean-Paul A.
Vrijhof, H.J. Eric J.
author_facet Hoekstra, Robert J.
Goossens, Ward J.H.
Beulens, Alexander
van Herk, Hilde
Hoevenaars, Brigiet M.
de Baaij, Joost
Somford, Diederik M.
Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel
van Basten, Jean-Paul A.
Vrijhof, H.J. Eric J.
author_sort Hoekstra, Robert J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The minimum volume standard is 100 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) procedures per hospital in the Netherlands, so patients have to be referred to high-volume surgical centers for RARP. During preoperative work-up, prostate biopsies taken elsewhere are reassessed, with upgrading or downgrading of the initial Gleason grade group a possible consequence. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prostate biopsy reassessment leads to adjustment of the surgical plan regarding a nerve-sparing approach and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) during RARP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: For 125 men who were referred to the Prosper prostate center at Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital (CWH) in the Netherlands between 2013 and 2016, results for the initial assessment of prostate biopsy by a local uropathologist were compared to results for biopsy reassessment by dedicated uropathologists at CWH. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The pathologists reached agreement in 80% of the cases. In cases for which there was disagreement (n = 25), biopsy revision involved upgrading of the initial grade group in 68% and downgrading in 32%. Biopsy reassessment led to a change in surgical plan in ten cases (8%). As a result of upgrading, ePLND was performed in three patients (2%). ePLND was omitted in one patient (1%) because of downgrading. For three patients (2%) a non–nerve-sparing procedure was planned after upgrading of the initial grade group. For four patients (3%), a unilateral nerve-sparing procedure was performed after downgrading. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that there is large interobserver agreement between uropathologists in the assessment of Gleason grade group in prostate biopsy specimens. Reassessment rarely leads to a change in surgical plan regarding the indication for a nerve-sparing approach and ePLND. Therefore, reassessment of prostate biopsy before radical prostatectomy can be omitted when the initial pathological assessment was performed by a dedicated uropathologist. PATIENT SUMMARY: Reassessment of the initial prostate biopsy specimen for patients referred to a specialist center for robot-assisted removal of the prostate rarely influences surgical planning and can be omitted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8317876
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83178762021-07-29 Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning Hoekstra, Robert J. Goossens, Ward J.H. Beulens, Alexander van Herk, Hilde Hoevenaars, Brigiet M. de Baaij, Joost Somford, Diederik M. Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel van Basten, Jean-Paul A. Vrijhof, H.J. Eric J. Eur Urol Open Sci Prostate Cancer BACKGROUND: The minimum volume standard is 100 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) procedures per hospital in the Netherlands, so patients have to be referred to high-volume surgical centers for RARP. During preoperative work-up, prostate biopsies taken elsewhere are reassessed, with upgrading or downgrading of the initial Gleason grade group a possible consequence. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prostate biopsy reassessment leads to adjustment of the surgical plan regarding a nerve-sparing approach and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) during RARP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: For 125 men who were referred to the Prosper prostate center at Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital (CWH) in the Netherlands between 2013 and 2016, results for the initial assessment of prostate biopsy by a local uropathologist were compared to results for biopsy reassessment by dedicated uropathologists at CWH. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The pathologists reached agreement in 80% of the cases. In cases for which there was disagreement (n = 25), biopsy revision involved upgrading of the initial grade group in 68% and downgrading in 32%. Biopsy reassessment led to a change in surgical plan in ten cases (8%). As a result of upgrading, ePLND was performed in three patients (2%). ePLND was omitted in one patient (1%) because of downgrading. For three patients (2%) a non–nerve-sparing procedure was planned after upgrading of the initial grade group. For four patients (3%), a unilateral nerve-sparing procedure was performed after downgrading. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that there is large interobserver agreement between uropathologists in the assessment of Gleason grade group in prostate biopsy specimens. Reassessment rarely leads to a change in surgical plan regarding the indication for a nerve-sparing approach and ePLND. Therefore, reassessment of prostate biopsy before radical prostatectomy can be omitted when the initial pathological assessment was performed by a dedicated uropathologist. PATIENT SUMMARY: Reassessment of the initial prostate biopsy specimen for patients referred to a specialist center for robot-assisted removal of the prostate rarely influences surgical planning and can be omitted. Elsevier 2021-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8317876/ /pubmed/34337523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.04.003 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Prostate Cancer
Hoekstra, Robert J.
Goossens, Ward J.H.
Beulens, Alexander
van Herk, Hilde
Hoevenaars, Brigiet M.
de Baaij, Joost
Somford, Diederik M.
Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel
van Basten, Jean-Paul A.
Vrijhof, H.J. Eric J.
Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title_full Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title_fullStr Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title_full_unstemmed Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title_short Reassessment of Prostate Biopsy Specimens for Patients Referred for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Rarely Influences Surgical Planning
title_sort reassessment of prostate biopsy specimens for patients referred for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy rarely influences surgical planning
topic Prostate Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8317876/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34337523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.04.003
work_keys_str_mv AT hoekstrarobertj reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT goossenswardjh reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT beulensalexander reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT vanherkhilde reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT hoevenaarsbrigietm reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT debaaijjoost reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT somforddiederikm reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT sedelaarjpmichiel reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT vanbastenjeanpaula reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning
AT vrijhofhjericj reassessmentofprostatebiopsyspecimensforpatientsreferredforrobotassistedradicalprostatectomyrarelyinfluencessurgicalplanning