Home > Journals > Minerva Urology and Nephrology > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 June;72(3) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 June;72(3):332-8

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

Publishing options
eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Free accessfree

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 June;72(3):332-8

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03110-2

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Is there a clinical role for frozen section analysis during partial nephrectomy? A multicenter experience over 10 years

Giorgio BOZZINI 1 , Mauro SEVESO 1, Javier R. OTERO 2, Boris OSMOLORSKIJ 3, Eduard GARCIA CRUZ 4, Markus MARGREITER 5, Paolo VERZE 6, Umberto BESANA 1, Carlo BUIZZA 1

1 Department of Urology, ASST Valle Olona, Busto Arsizio, Varese, Italy; 2 Department of Urology, 12 De Octubre University Hospital, Madrid, Spain; 3 Department of Urology, Lomonosov Hospital, Moscow, Russia; 4 Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain; 5 Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria; 6 Department of Urology, Federico II University, Naples, Italy



BACKGROUND: Frozen section analysis (FSA) is frequently performed during partial nephrectomy (PN). We investigate the utility of intraoperative FSA by evaluating its impact on final surgical margin (SM) status.
METHODS: Between January 1995 and December 2005, a series of patients who were treated with open PN for renal cell carcinoma was prospectively analyzed. During PN, each patient underwent a FSA on renal parenchyma distal margin. If FSA was positive for infiltration a deeper excision was performed till obtaining a negative FSA. SM outcome of the FSA was compared with the final pathology report. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cost analysis on the FSA performed were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total number of 373 patients were enrolled. FSA was performed in all the patients considered for PN. Fifteen patients had a conversion to radical nephrectomy. Positive SMs at the definitive pathological outcome were found in 36 patients (9.6%). FSA was positive in eight patients (2.1%). In that eight cases after a deeper excision the definitive pathological outcome on SM was still positive in two cases. FSA revealed just 14.3% of the positive SM. Patients with positive SM had a worse follow up considering RFS (P<0.05). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that FSA did not considerably contribute to prevent recurrence (P=0.35). 1438 euros was the mean cost of performing a FSA during PN.
CONCLUSIONS: FSA during PN does not reduce the risk of positive SMs. The use of FSA has also a higher cost related to the procedure.


KEY WORDS: Frozen sections; Nephrectomy; Renal cell carcinoma; Margins of excision; Local neoplasm recurrence

top of page