Purpose: To investigate the association between apical margin positivity and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients who have undergone robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP). Patients and Methods: From September 2010 through November 2012, we treated 84 Japanese men with clinically localized prostate cancer with RARP. The excised specimens, which were divided into right and left fragments, were evaluated for the presence of positive surgical margins (PSMs) and preoperative MRI findings. Results: The overall PSM rate was 21.4% (18 of 84 patients), 83.3% (15 of 18 cases) of which were situated in the apex. Evaluating the prostate divided into right and left fragments, the PSM rate was 10.7% at the apex (18 of 168 fragments). Cancer was suspected via preoperative MRI in 39 fragments (23.2%) and detected in the prostatic apex by prostate biopsy in 67 fragments (39.9%). Multiple regression analysis revealed that MRI and nerve-sparing procedures significantly indicate apical margin positivity (p = 0.005). Conclusions: The prostatic apex is the most common location of PSMs after RARP. Our results demonstrate that preoperative MRI for cancer of the prostatic apex may provide substantial information and enable complete cancer clearance.

Keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging, Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, Surgical margins, Prostatic apex
1.
Binder J, Kramer W: Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001;87:408-410.
2.
Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K: Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int 2007;99:1109-1112.
3.
Takenaka A, Tewari AK: Anatomical basis for carrying out a state-of-the-art radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 2012;19:7-19.
4.
D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Schnall M, Tomaszewski JE, Wein A: Combined modality staging of prostate carcinoma and its utility in predicting pathologic stage and postoperative prostate specific antigen failure. Urology 1997;49(3A suppl):23-30.
5.
Claus FG, Hricak H, Hattery RR: Pretreatment evaluation of prostate cancer: role of MR imaging and 1H MR spectroscopy. Radiographics 2004;24(suppl 1):S167-S180.
6.
Mullerad M, Hricak H, Kuroiwa K, Pucar D, Chen HN, Kattan MW, Scardino PT: Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer. J Urol 2005;174:2158-2163.
7.
Wefer AE, Hricak H, Vigneron DB, Coakley FV, Lu Y, Wefer J, Mueller-Lisse U, Carroll PR, Kurhanewicz J: Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology. J Urol 2000;164:400-404.
8.
Kozlowski P, Chang SD, Jones EC, Berean KW, Chen H, Goldenberg SL: Combined diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis - correlation with biopsy and histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:108-113.
9.
Watanabe Y, Terai A, Araki T, Nagayama M, Okumura A, Amoh Y, Ishimori T, Ishibashi M, Nakashita S, Dodo Y: Detection and localization of prostate cancer with the targeted biopsy strategy based on ADC map: a prospective large-scale cohort study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;35:1414-1421.
10.
Pfitzenmaier J, Pahernik S, Tremmel T, Haferkamp A, Buse S, Hohenfellner M: Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: do they have an impact on biochemical or clinical progression? BJU Int 2008;102:1413-1418.
11.
Pettus JA, Weight CJ, Thompson CJ, Middleton RG, Stephenson RA: Biochemical failure in men following radical retropubic prostatectomy: impact of surgical margin status and location. J Urol 2004;172:129-132.
12.
Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Mudaliar K, Tan GY, Grover S, El Douaihy Y, Peters D, Leung R, Yadav R, John M, Wysock J, Vaughan ED, Muir S, Amin MB, Rubin M, Tu J, Akthar M, Shevchuk M: Anatomical retro-apical technique of synchronous (posterior and anterior) urethral transection: a novel approach for ameliorating apical margin positivity during robotic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2010;106:1364-1373.
13.
Walz J, Burnett AL, Costello AJ, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guillonneau B, Menon M, Montorsi F, Myers RP, Rocco B, Villers A: A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy related to optimization of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010;57:179-192.
14.
Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Häggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spångberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Garmo H, Palmgren J, Adami HO, Norlén BJ, Johansson JE: Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1977-1984.
15.
Bastide C, Savage C, Cronin A, Zelefsky MJ, Eastham JA, Touijer K, Scardino PT, Guillonneau BD: Location and number of positive surgical margins as prognostic factors of biochemical recurrence after salvage radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2010;106:1454-1457.
16.
Salomon L, Anastasiadis AG, Antiphon P, Levrel O, Saint F, De La Taille A, Cicco A, Vordos D, Hoznek A, Chopin D, Abbou CC: Prognostic consequences of the location of positive surgical margins in organ-confined prostate cancer. Urol Int 2003;70:291-296.
17.
Ayala AG, Ro JY, Babaian R, Troncoso P, Grignon DJ: The prostatic capsule: does it exist? Its importance in the staging and treatment of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1989;13:21-27.
18.
Murakami G, Nakajima F, Sato TJ, Tsugane MH, Taguchi K, Tsukamoto T: Individual variations in aging of the male urethral rhabdosphincter in Japanese. Clin Anat 2002;15:241-252.
19.
Elbadawi A, Mathews R, Light JK, Wheeler TM: Immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study of rhabdosphincter component of the prostatic capsule. J Urol 1997;158:1819-1828.
20.
Koppie TM, Bianco FJ Jr, Kuroiwa K, Reuter VE, Guillonneau B, Eastham JA, Scardino PT: The clinical features of anterior prostate cancers. BJU Int 2006;98:1167-1171.
21.
Tan N, Margolis DJ, McClure TD, Thomas A, Finley DS, Reiter RE, Huang J, Raman SS: Radical prostatectomy: value of prostate MRI in surgical planning. Abdom Imaging 2012;37:664-674.
22.
Girouin N, Mège-Lechevallier F, Tonina Senes A, Bissery A, Rabilloud M, Maréchal JM, Colombel M, Lyonnet D, Rouvière O: Prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with simple visual diagnostic criteria: is it reasonable? Eur Radiol 2007;17:1498-1509.
23.
Fütterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Hartman RP, King BF, Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa CA, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO: Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1055-1065.
24.
Chandra RV, Heinze S, Dowling R, Shadbolt C, Costello A, Pedersen J: Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging staging of prostate cancer. ANZ J Surg 2007;77:860-865.
25.
Lee SH, Park KK, Choi KH, Lim BJ, Kim JH, Lee SW, Chung BH: Is endorectal coil necessary for the staging of clinically localized prostate cancer? Comparison of non-endorectal versus endorectal MR imaging. World J Urol 2010;28:667-672.
26.
Guru KA, Perlmutter AE, Sheldon MJ, Butt ZM, Zhang S, Tan W, Wilding G, Kim HL, Mohler JL: Apical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: does technique matter? J Endourol 2009;23:123-127.
27.
Lei Y, Alemozaffar M, Williams SB, Hevelone N, Lipsitz SR, Plaster BA, Amarasekera CA, Ulmer WD, Huang AC, Kowalczyk KJ, Hu JC: Athermal division and selective suture ligation of the dorsal vein complex during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of technique and outcomes. Eur Urol 2011;59:235-243.
28.
Sooriakumaran P, John M, Wiklund P, Lee D, Nilsson A, Tewari AK: Learning curve for robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study of 3794 patients. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2011;63:191-198.
29.
Tanaka K, Shigemura K, Muramaki M, Takahashi S, Miyake H, Fujisawa M: Efficacy of using three-tesla magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of capsule invasion for decision-making about neurovascular bundle preservation in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Korean J Urol 2013;54:437-441.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.