International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5: Surgical margins

Puay Hoon Tan, Liang Cheng, John R. Srigley, David Griffiths, Peter A. Humphrey, Theodore H. Van Der Kwast, Rodolfo Montironi, Thomas M. Wheeler, Brett Delahunt, Lars Egevad, Jonathan I. Epstein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

142 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The 2009 International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference in Boston, made recommendations regarding the standardization of pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Issues relating to surgical margin assessment were coordinated by working group 5. Pathologists agreed that tumor extending close to the capsular margin, yet not to it, should be reported as a negative margin, and that locations of positive margins should be indicated as either posterior, posterolateral, lateral, anterior at the prostatic apex, mid-prostate or base. Other items of consensus included specifying the extent of any positive margin as millimeters of involvement; tumor in skeletal muscle at the apical perpendicular margin section, in the absence of accompanying benign glands, to be considered organ confined; and that proximal and distal margins be uniformly referred to as bladder neck and prostatic apex, respectively. Grading of tumor at positive margins was to be left to the discretion of the reporting pathologists. There was no consensus as to how the surgical margin should be regarded when tumor is present at the inked edge of the tissue, in the absence of transected benign glands at the apical margin. Pathologists also did not achieve agreement on the reporting approach to benign prostatic glands at an inked surgical margin in which no carcinoma is present.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)48-57
Number of pages10
JournalModern Pathology
Volume24
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2011

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Pathology
Neoplasms
Neoplasm Grading
Prostate
Skeletal Muscle
Urinary Bladder
Carcinoma
Margins of Excision
Pathologists

Keywords

  • incision
  • prostate adenocarcinoma
  • prostatic apex
  • radical prostatectomy
  • surgical margins

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5 : Surgical margins. / Tan, Puay Hoon; Cheng, Liang; Srigley, John R.; Griffiths, David; Humphrey, Peter A.; Van Der Kwast, Theodore H.; Montironi, Rodolfo; Wheeler, Thomas M.; Delahunt, Brett; Egevad, Lars; Epstein, Jonathan I.

In: Modern Pathology, Vol. 24, No. 1, 01.2011, p. 48-57.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tan, PH, Cheng, L, Srigley, JR, Griffiths, D, Humphrey, PA, Van Der Kwast, TH, Montironi, R, Wheeler, TM, Delahunt, B, Egevad, L & Epstein, JI 2011, 'International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5: Surgical margins', Modern Pathology, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 48-57. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2010.155
Tan, Puay Hoon ; Cheng, Liang ; Srigley, John R. ; Griffiths, David ; Humphrey, Peter A. ; Van Der Kwast, Theodore H. ; Montironi, Rodolfo ; Wheeler, Thomas M. ; Delahunt, Brett ; Egevad, Lars ; Epstein, Jonathan I. / International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5 : Surgical margins. In: Modern Pathology. 2011 ; Vol. 24, No. 1. pp. 48-57.
@article{45de28222c674dbf9f46b5d8a1279b2a,
title = "International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5: Surgical margins",
abstract = "The 2009 International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference in Boston, made recommendations regarding the standardization of pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Issues relating to surgical margin assessment were coordinated by working group 5. Pathologists agreed that tumor extending close to the capsular margin, yet not to it, should be reported as a negative margin, and that locations of positive margins should be indicated as either posterior, posterolateral, lateral, anterior at the prostatic apex, mid-prostate or base. Other items of consensus included specifying the extent of any positive margin as millimeters of involvement; tumor in skeletal muscle at the apical perpendicular margin section, in the absence of accompanying benign glands, to be considered organ confined; and that proximal and distal margins be uniformly referred to as bladder neck and prostatic apex, respectively. Grading of tumor at positive margins was to be left to the discretion of the reporting pathologists. There was no consensus as to how the surgical margin should be regarded when tumor is present at the inked edge of the tissue, in the absence of transected benign glands at the apical margin. Pathologists also did not achieve agreement on the reporting approach to benign prostatic glands at an inked surgical margin in which no carcinoma is present.",
keywords = "incision, prostate adenocarcinoma, prostatic apex, radical prostatectomy, surgical margins",
author = "Tan, {Puay Hoon} and Liang Cheng and Srigley, {John R.} and David Griffiths and Humphrey, {Peter A.} and {Van Der Kwast}, {Theodore H.} and Rodolfo Montironi and Wheeler, {Thomas M.} and Brett Delahunt and Lars Egevad and Epstein, {Jonathan I.}",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1038/modpathol.2010.155",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "48--57",
journal = "Modern Pathology",
issn = "0893-3952",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - International society of urological pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 5

T2 - Surgical margins

AU - Tan, Puay Hoon

AU - Cheng, Liang

AU - Srigley, John R.

AU - Griffiths, David

AU - Humphrey, Peter A.

AU - Van Der Kwast, Theodore H.

AU - Montironi, Rodolfo

AU - Wheeler, Thomas M.

AU - Delahunt, Brett

AU - Egevad, Lars

AU - Epstein, Jonathan I.

PY - 2011/1

Y1 - 2011/1

N2 - The 2009 International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference in Boston, made recommendations regarding the standardization of pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Issues relating to surgical margin assessment were coordinated by working group 5. Pathologists agreed that tumor extending close to the capsular margin, yet not to it, should be reported as a negative margin, and that locations of positive margins should be indicated as either posterior, posterolateral, lateral, anterior at the prostatic apex, mid-prostate or base. Other items of consensus included specifying the extent of any positive margin as millimeters of involvement; tumor in skeletal muscle at the apical perpendicular margin section, in the absence of accompanying benign glands, to be considered organ confined; and that proximal and distal margins be uniformly referred to as bladder neck and prostatic apex, respectively. Grading of tumor at positive margins was to be left to the discretion of the reporting pathologists. There was no consensus as to how the surgical margin should be regarded when tumor is present at the inked edge of the tissue, in the absence of transected benign glands at the apical margin. Pathologists also did not achieve agreement on the reporting approach to benign prostatic glands at an inked surgical margin in which no carcinoma is present.

AB - The 2009 International Society of Urological Pathology Consensus Conference in Boston, made recommendations regarding the standardization of pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. Issues relating to surgical margin assessment were coordinated by working group 5. Pathologists agreed that tumor extending close to the capsular margin, yet not to it, should be reported as a negative margin, and that locations of positive margins should be indicated as either posterior, posterolateral, lateral, anterior at the prostatic apex, mid-prostate or base. Other items of consensus included specifying the extent of any positive margin as millimeters of involvement; tumor in skeletal muscle at the apical perpendicular margin section, in the absence of accompanying benign glands, to be considered organ confined; and that proximal and distal margins be uniformly referred to as bladder neck and prostatic apex, respectively. Grading of tumor at positive margins was to be left to the discretion of the reporting pathologists. There was no consensus as to how the surgical margin should be regarded when tumor is present at the inked edge of the tissue, in the absence of transected benign glands at the apical margin. Pathologists also did not achieve agreement on the reporting approach to benign prostatic glands at an inked surgical margin in which no carcinoma is present.

KW - incision

KW - prostate adenocarcinoma

KW - prostatic apex

KW - radical prostatectomy

KW - surgical margins

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78650858403&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78650858403&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/modpathol.2010.155

DO - 10.1038/modpathol.2010.155

M3 - Article

C2 - 20729812

AN - SCOPUS:78650858403

VL - 24

SP - 48

EP - 57

JO - Modern Pathology

JF - Modern Pathology

SN - 0893-3952

IS - 1

ER -