Advertisement

Morphological Features and Problems of Incidental Prostatic Carcinoma

  • H. Kastendieck
Conference paper

Abstract

The incidental prostatic carcinoma is a lesion discovered by chance during the histological examination of resected tissue and comes as a complete surprise to the urologist. For a long time it remained unclear how this tumor should be defined, classified, and histopathologically and biologically interpreted. In recent years a host of suggestions have been made and studies conducted to deal with this problem [2, 5, 7, 11, 16, 17, 19, 22, 23]. These efforts have completed the histomorphological picture of the incidental prostatic carcinoma. The pathoanatomical features that distinguish this tumor from the clinically manifest, rectally palpable, and symptom-evoking prostatic carcinoma are its origin, growth, and histomorphology.

Keywords

Radical Prostatectomy Residual Tumor Gleason Score Prostatic Carcinoma Residual Tumor Tissue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aragona F, Franco V, Rodolico V, Dardanoni G, Cabibi D, Melloni D, Pavone C, Campesi G, Pavone-Macaluso M (1989) Interactive computerized morphometric analysis for the differential diagnosis between dysplasia and well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Urol Res 17:35–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bass RB Jr, Barrett DM (1980) Radical retropubic prostatectomy after transurethral prostatic resection. J Urol 124:495–497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brawer MK, Peehl DM, Stamey TA, Bostwick DG (1985) Keratin immunoreactivity in the benign and neoplastic human prostate. Cancer Res 45:3663–3667PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cantrell BB, deKlerk DP, Eggleston JC, Boitnott JK, Walsh PC (1981) Pathological factors that influence prognosis in stage A prostatic cancer: the influence of extent versus grade. J Urol 125:516–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elder JS, Gibbons RP, Correa RJ Jr, Brannen GE (1985) Efficacy of radical prostatectomy for stage A2 carcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 56:2151–2154PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Epstein JI, Pauli G, Eggleston JC, Walsh PC (1986) Prognosis of untreated stage A1 prostatic carcinoma: a study of 94 cases with extended followup. J Urol 136:837PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fowler JE Jr, Mills SE (1985) Operable prostatic carcinoma: correlations among clinical stage, pathological stage, Gleason histological score and early disease-free survival. J Urol 133:49–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Golimbu M, Morales P (1979) Stage A2 prostatic carcinoma. Should staging systems be reclassified? Urology 13:592–596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hedrick L, Epstein JI (1989) Use of keratin 903 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of prostate carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 13:389–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Helpap B, Böcking A, Dhom G, Faul P, Kastendieck H, Leistenschneider W, Müller H-A (1985) Klassifikation, histologisches und zytologisches Grading sowie Regressionsgrading des Prostatakarzinoms. Pathologie 6:3–7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Humphrey P, Vollmer RT (1988) The ratio of prostate chips with cancer: a new measure of tumor extent and its relationship to grade and prognosis. Hum Pathol 19:411–418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jewett HJ (1975) The presence status of radical prostatectomy for stages A and B prostatic cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2:105–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kastendieck H (1984) Klassifikation, Morphologie und Pathogenese des inzidenten Prostatakarzinoms. In: Helpap B, Senge T, Vahlensieck H (eds) Die Prostata, Vol 2. pmi, Frankfurt/Main, pp 133–164Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kastendieck H (1987) Klinisches versus inzidentes Prostatakarzinom: Pathomorphologische Aspekte als Therapiegrundlage. In: Nagel R (ed) Konservative Therapie des Prostatakarzinoms. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kastendieck H, Helpap B (1989) Prostatic “dysplasia/atypical hyperplasia.” Terminology, histopathology, pathobiology, and significance. Urology XXXIV (Suppl):28–42Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lowe BA, Listrom MB (1988) Incidental carcinoma of the prostate: an analysis of the predictors of progression. J Urol 140:1340–1344PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lowe BA, Listrom MB (1988) Management of stage A prostate cancer with a high probability of progression. J Urol 140:1345–1347PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McIntire TL, Murphy WM, Coon JS, Chandler RW, Schwartz D, Conway S, Weinstein RS (1988) The prognostic value of DNA ploidy combined with histologic substaging for incidental carcinoma of the prostate gland. Am J Clin Pathol 89:370–373PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McNeal JE, Price HM, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA (1988) Stage A versus stage B adenocarcinoma of the prostate: morphological comparison and biological significance. J Urol 139:61–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA (1988) Zonal distributiion of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. J Am Surg Pathol 12:897–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mostofi FK, Price EB (1973) Tumors of the male genital system. Atlas of tumor pathology. Sec Ser Fasc 8. AFIP WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Parfitt HE Jr, Smith JA Jr, Gliedman JB, Middleton RG (1983) Accuracy of staging in A1 carcinoma of the prostate. Cancer 51:2346–2350PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rohr LR (1987) Incidental adenocarcinoma in transurethral resections of the prostate: partial versus complete microscopic examination. Am J Surg Pathol 11:53–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, Redwine E (1988) Morphometric and clinical studies on 68 consecutive radical prostatectomies. J Urol 139:1235–1241PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vollmer RT (1986) Prostate cancer and chip specimens: complete versus partial sampling. Hum Pathol 17:285–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wernert N, Seitz G, Goebbels R, Dhom G (1986) Immunohistochemical demonstration of cytokeratins in the human prostate. Pathol Res Pract 181:668–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Kastendieck
    • 1
  1. 1.Abteilung für PathologieAllgemeines Krankenhaus HarburgHamburg 90Germany

Personalised recommendations