No recent studies have focused on assessing the role of intraoperative frozen section assessment (FSA) in the status of surgical margins (SMs) relating to the outcomes of penectomy cases. In this study, we investigated the utility of routine FSA of the SMs in men undergoing penectomy. A retrospective review identified consecutive patients who underwent partial (n = 26) or total (n = 12) penectomy for penile squamous cell carcinoma at our institution from 2004 to 2015. FSA of the SMs was performed in 21 (80.8%) partial and 10 (83.3%) total penectomies. FSAs were reported as positive (n = 3, 9.7%), atypical (n = 3, 9.7%), and negative (n = 25, 80.6%). All of the positive or negative FSA diagnoses were confirmed accurate on the frozen section controls, whereas the 3 cases with atypical FSA had non-malignant, atypical, and carcinoma cells, respectively, on the controls. Final SMs were positive in 6 (15.8%) penectomies, including 4 (12.9%) FSA cases versus 2 (28.6%) non-FSA cases (P = 0.569). Furthermore, initial positive (1 of 3) and atypical (3 of 3) FSA cases achieved negative conversion by excision of additional tissue sent for FSA. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that performing FSA or its number/diagnosis was not significantly associated with disease progression. Thus, performing FSA during penectomy does not appear to have any significant impact on final SM status nor long-term oncologic outcomes. However, as seen in at least 4 cases, select patients may benefit from the routine FSA.
Pathology & Oncology Research – Springer Journals
Published: Jun 3, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera