167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26519964)
1. [Analysis and prognostic factors of the specimen of radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer].
Fromont G; Molinié V; Soulié M; Salomon L
Prog Urol; 2015 Nov; 25(15):999-1009. PubMed ID: 26519964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prognostic factors and reporting of prostate carcinoma in radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens.
Epstein JI; Amin M; Boccon-Gibod L; Egevad L; Humphrey PA; Mikuz G; Newling D; Nilsson S; Sakr W; Srigley JR; Wheeler TM; Montironi R
Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl; 2005 May; (216):34-63. PubMed ID: 16019758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Indications for pelvic lymphadenectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer].
Peneau M; Villers A; Molinié V; Theis D; Soulié M
Prog Urol; 2004 Jun; 14(3):287-94. PubMed ID: 15373168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Key issues in handling and reporting radical prostatectomy specimens.
Srigley JR
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2006 Mar; 130(3):303-17. PubMed ID: 16519557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Surgery of prostate cancer: Technical principles and perioperative complications].
Salomon L; Rozet F; Soulié M
Prog Urol; 2015 Nov; 25(15):966-98. PubMed ID: 26519963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The actual value of the surgical margin status as a predictor of disease progression in men with early prostate cancer.
Vis AN; Schröder FH; van der Kwast TH
Eur Urol; 2006 Aug; 50(2):258-65. PubMed ID: 16413660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. International society of urological pathology consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens.
Egevad L; Srigley JR; Delahunt B
Adv Anat Pathol; 2011 Jul; 18(4):301-5. PubMed ID: 21654361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment in patients with specimen-confined high pathological Gleason score prostate cancer.
Lughezzani G; Gallina A; Larcher A; Briganti A; Capitanio U; Suardi N; Lista G; Abrate A; Sangalli MN; Buffi N; Cestari A; Guazzoni G; Rigatti P; Montorsi F
BJU Int; 2013 May; 111(5):723-30. PubMed ID: 22487441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens].
Compérat E; Camparo P; Srigley J; Delahunt B; Egevad L;
Ann Pathol; 2013 Jun; 33(3):155-61. PubMed ID: 23790653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Treatments around surgery of prostate cancer and surgery of recurrence].
Salomon L; Ploussard G; Hennequin C; Richaud P; Soulié M
Prog Urol; 2015 Nov; 25(15):1086-107. PubMed ID: 26519968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Intraoperative frozen section of the prostate decreases positive margin rate while ensuring nerve sparing procedure during radical prostatectomy.
von Bodman C; Brock M; Roghmann F; Byers A; Löppenberg B; Braun K; Pastor J; Sommerer F; Noldus J; Palisaar RJ
J Urol; 2013 Aug; 190(2):515-20. PubMed ID: 23415965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Perineural invasion status, Gleason score and number of positive cores in biopsy pathology are predictors of positive surgical margin following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Yang R; Cao K; Han T; Zhang YF; Zhang GT; Xu LF; Lian HB; Li XG; Guo HQ
Asian J Androl; 2017; 19(4):468-472. PubMed ID: 27004537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Implementation of a map in radical prostatectomy specimen allows visual estimation of tumor volume.
Bettendorf O; Oberpenning F; Köpke T; Heinecke A; Hertle L; Boecker W; Semjonow A
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2007 Apr; 33(3):352-7. PubMed ID: 17175129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Contemporary approaches for processing and handling of radical prostactomy specimens.
Sung MT; Cheng L
Histol Histopathol; 2010 Feb; 25(2):259-65. PubMed ID: 20017111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Impact of positive surgical margins on prostate-specific antigen failure after radical prostatectomy in adjuvant treatment-naïve patients.
Ploussard G; Agamy MA; Alenda O; Allory Y; Mouracade P; Vordos D; Hoznek A; Abbou CC; de la Taille A; Salomon L
BJU Int; 2011 Jun; 107(11):1748-54. PubMed ID: 20883488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Correlation of the primary Gleason pattern on prostate needle biopsy with clinico-pathological factors in Gleason 7 tumors.
Grober ED; Tsihlias J; Jewett MA; Sweet JM; Evans AJ; Trachtenberg J; Robinette M; Nam RK
Can J Urol; 2004 Feb; 11(1):2157-62. PubMed ID: 15003158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Existence of pattern 5 on radical prostatectomy: poor prognostic factor associated with a lower biochemical recurrence-free survival].
Pastori J; Balssa L; Lillaz J; Guichard G; Chabannes E; Bernardini S; Bittard H; Thiery-Vuillemin A; Kleinclauss F
Prog Urol; 2014 Jun; 24(7):433-40. PubMed ID: 24861683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluating radical prostatectomy specimens: therapeutic and prognostic importance.
Bostwick DG; Montironi R
Virchows Arch; 1997 Jan; 430(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 9037309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Should we replace the Gleason score with the amount of high-grade prostate cancer?
Vis AN; Roemeling S; Kranse R; Schröder FH; van der Kwast TH
Eur Urol; 2007 Apr; 51(4):931-9. PubMed ID: 16935413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 is the best predictor of cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.
Cheng L; Koch MO; Juliar BE; Daggy JK; Foster RS; Bihrle R; Gardner TA
J Clin Oncol; 2005 May; 23(13):2911-7. PubMed ID: 15860849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
