Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71(4):618–629
Yossepowitch O, Engelstein D, Konichezky M, Sella A, Livne PM, Baniel J (2000) Bladder neck involvement at radical prostatectomy: positive margins or advanced T4 disease? Urology 56(3):448–452
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Boorjian SA, Tollefson MK, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Karnes RJ (2012) Clinicopathological predictors of systemic progression and prostate cancer mortality in patients with a positive surgical margin at radical prostatectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 15(1):56–62
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Chalfin HJ, Dinizo M, Trock BJ, Feng Z, Partin AW, Walsh PC et al (2012) Impact of surgical margin status on prostate-cancer-specific mortality. BJU Int 110(11):1684–1689
Mauermann J, Fradet V, Lacombe L, Dujardin T, Tiguert R, Tetu B et al (2013) The impact of solitary and multiple positive surgical margins on hard clinical end points in 1712 adjuvant treatment-naive pT2-4 N0 radical prostatectomy patients. Eur Urol 64(1):19–25
Wright JL, Dalkin BL, True LD, Ellis WJ, Stanford JL, Lange PH et al (2010) Positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy predict prostate cancer specific mortality. J Urol 183(6):2213–2218
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Yossepowitch O, Bjartell A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guillonneau BD, Karakiewicz PI et al (2009) Positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy: outlining the problem and its long-term consequences. Eur Urol 55(1):87–99
Lian Z, Zhang H, He Z, Ma S, Wang X, Liu R (2020) Impact of positive surgical margin location and perineural invasion on biochemical recurrence in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. World J Surg Oncol 18(1):201
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Dev HS, Wiklund P, Patel V, Parashar D, Palmer K, Nyberg T et al (2015) Surgical margin length and location affect recurrence rates after robotic prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 33(3):109.e7–13
Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M, Serio AM, Gorbonos A, Maru N et al (2007) Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 70(5):965–969
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 4:1
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Team RC. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Balduzzi S, Rücker G, Nikolakopoulou A, Papakonstantinou T, Salanti G, Efthimiou O et al (2023) netmeta: an R package for network meta-analysis using frequentist methods. J Stat Softw 106(2):1–40
Harrer M, Cuijpers P, Furukawa T, Ebert (2019) dmetar: Companion R Package For The Guide 'Doing Meta-Analysis in R'. R package version 0.0.9000
Wickham HFR, Henry L, Müller K, Vaughan D (2023) _dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation_. R package version 1.1.2.
Wells G, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson j, Welch V, Losos M et al (2000) The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analysis
Sofer M, Hamilton-Nelson KL, Civantos F, Soloway MS (2002) Positive surgical margins after radical retropubic prostatectomy: the influence of site and number on progression. J Urol 167(6):2453–2456
Obek C, Sadek S, Lai S, Civantos F, Rubinowicz D, Soloway MS (1999) Positive surgical margins with radical retropubic prostatectomy: anatomic site-specific pathologic analysis and impact on prognosis. Urology 54(4):682–688
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Hsu M, Chang SL, Ferrari M, Nolley R, Presti JC Jr, Brooks JD (2011) Length of site-specific positive surgical margins as a risk factor for biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 18(4):272–279
Wu S, Lin SX, Wirth GJ, Lu M, Lu J, Subtelny AO et al (2020) Long-term oncologic impact of positive anterior and posterior surgical margins after radical prostatectomy. Am J Clin Oncol 43(12):872–879
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kurose H, Ueda K, Ogasawara N, Chikui K, Nakiri M, Nishihara K et al (2022) Impact of Gleason score of the tumor at the positive surgical margin as a prognostic factor. Mol Clin Oncol 16(4):82
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Sooriakumaran P, Dev HS, Skarecky D, Ahlering T (2016) The importance of surgical margins in prostate cancer. J Surg Oncol 113(3):310–315
Özman O, Berrens AC, Pos F, van Leeuwen PJ, van der Poel H (2022) The effect of salvage radiation therapy on survival, functional outcomes, and quality of life in men with persistent prostate-specific antigen after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: which patient benefits more? Pract Radiat Oncol 12(6):e538–e546
Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M et al (2021) EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II-2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 79(2):263–282
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, Kynaston HG, Petersen PM, Catton C et al (2020) Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 396(10260):1413–1421
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Tilki D, Chen M-H, Wu J, Huland H, Graefen M, Wiegel T et al (2021) Adjuvant versus early salvage radiation therapy for men at high risk for recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer and the risk of death. J Clin Oncol 39(20):2284–2293
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Sooriakumaran P, Ploumidis A, Haendler L, Nyberg T, Olsson M, Carlsson S et al (2013) Impact of length of positive surgical margins (PSM) on biochemical recurrence (BCR) after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), in a single center series with follow-up of at least five years. J Endourol 27:A124–A125
John A, John H, Catterwell R, Selth LA, Callaghan MO (2021) Primary Gleason grade and Gleason grade group at positive surgical margins: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 127(Suppl 1):13–22
John A, Lim A, Catterwell R, Selth L, O’Callaghan M (2023) Length of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: does size matter?—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 8:9
Yossepowitch O, Briganti A, Eastham JA, Epstein J, Graefen M, Montironi R et al (2014) Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and contemporary update. Eur Urol 65(2):303–313
Fontenot PA, Mansour AM (2013) Reporting positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: time for standardization. BJU Int 111(8):E290–E299
Wu S, Lin SX, Wirth GJ, Lu M, Lu J, Subtelny AO et al (2019) Impact of multifocality and multilocation of positive surgical margin after radical prostatectomy on predicting oncological outcome. Clin Genitourin Cancer 17(1):e44–e52
Preisser F, Coxilha G, Heinze A, Oh S, Chun FK, Sauter G et al (2019) Impact of positive surgical margin length and Gleason grade at the margin on biochemical recurrence in patients with organ-confined prostate cancer. Prostate 79(16):1832–1836
Sammon JD, Trinh QD, Sukumar S, Ravi P, Friedman A, Sun M et al (2013) Risk factors for biochemical recurrence following radical perineal prostatectomy in a large contemporary series: a detailed assessment of margin extent and location. Urol Oncol 31(8):1470–1476
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Choo MS, Cho SY, Ko K, Jeong CW, Lee SB, Ku JH et al (2014) Impact of positive surgical margins and their locations after radical prostatectomy: comparison of biochemical recurrence according to risk stratification and surgical modality. World J Urol 32(6):1401–1409
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Chung MS, Lee SH, Lee DH, Chung BH (2013) Evaluation of the 7th American Joint Committee on cancer TNM staging system for prostate cancer in point of classification of bladder neck invasion. Jpn J Clin Oncol 43(2):184–188
Comments (0)