Risk Factors Analysis for Positive Surgical Margins in Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Yifu YAN,Yi HUANG,Lulin MA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-1420.2011.12.006
2011-01-01
Journal of Clinical Urology
Abstract:Objective:To analysis the risk factors for positive surgical margins in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Methods:We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and pathological data of 188 cases,who received laparoscopic radical prostatectomy from Jan.2004 to Dec.2010 in our hospital.The patients average 72 years old.All patients were dignosised by pathology before prostatectomy,and no metastasis was found before surgery.Univari-able analyse were used to estimate the relationship between the parameters and surgical margin status.Multivariable logistic regression analyse were used to determine relative risk factors for positive surgical margins.Results: Except that two patients were converted to open surgery,laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was successfully applied in other 186 patients.The operating time was average 246 min,the blood loss during operation was average 309 ml.76 cases(40.5%) had positive surgical margin.Result from univariable analyse showed there were significance difference between positive and negtive surgical margins patients on biopsy Gleason score,number of positive biopsy cores,surgical Gleason score,and pathological stage.On multivariable logistic regression analyses, surgical Gleason score and pathological stage were independent factor of positive surgical margins.A surgical Gleason score more than 7 was associated with a 17.1-fold higher chance of positive surgical margin than a surgical Gleason score not more than 6(OR:17.131,95%CI:5.237-56.037,P<0.001).A pathological stage of T_3 was associated with a 9.0-fold higher risk of positive surgical margin than a psthology stage of T_2(OR.8.970.95%CI: 4.128-19.493.P<0.001 ).Conclusions:Surgical Gleason score and pathological stage were independent factors of positive surgical margins in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.Patients with surgical Gleason score more than 7 and pathological stage of T_3 had a higher rate of positive surgical margins.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?