Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 27, 2026
04:45
Intraoperative Assessment of Resection Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: This is the Way
Published on: May 10, 2021
A retrospective comparison of 2 methods of intraoperative margin evaluation during partial nephrectomy
Ian S Hagemann1, James S Lewis
1Department of Pathology and Immunology, Division of Anatomic and Molecular Pathology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
The Journal of Urology
|December 17, 2008
Summary
The combined method of gross pathological consultation and tumor bed biopsy is most effective for achieving negative margins during partial nephrectomy. Gross consultation alone is better than tumor bed biopsy alone.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Surgical Pathology
- Oncology
Background:
- Intraoperative pathological consultation is crucial for negative margins in partial nephrectomy.
- Current methods include tumor bed biopsy and gross examination of the specimen.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the sensitivity and specificity of tumor bed biopsy, gross intraoperative consultation, and a combined method for detecting positive margins during partial nephrectomy.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 251 partial nephrectomy cases (2005-2007).
- Comparison of tumor bed biopsy, gross intraoperative consultation, and combined approach against final permanent section margins.
Main Results:
- Tumor bed biopsy alone had 25% sensitivity and 100% specificity for positive margins.
- Gross intraoperative consultation alone had 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity.
- The combined method achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity.
Conclusions:
- The combined gross pathological consultation and tumor bed biopsy method is recommended for routine practice.
- Gross intraoperative consultation is diagnostically superior to tumor bed biopsy when used alone.
- Relying solely on tumor bed biopsy for margin assessment is not supported by the data.
