Table 2 |
|||
|
Factors associated with positive surgical margins in prostatectomy specimens from RALP |
|||
|
Negative Margin |
Positive Margin |
P |
|
|
|
|||
|
Case number |
130 |
52 |
|
|
Tumor stage |
0.014* |
||
|
2a |
23 |
5 |
|
|
2b |
5 |
3 |
|
|
2c |
83 |
27 |
|
|
≥ 3a |
17 |
17 |
|
|
Tumor volume (%) |
14.1 ± 11.5** |
21.2 ± 17.2** |
0.021*** |
|
Gleason score |
6.5 ± 0.7** |
6.8 ± 0.8** |
0.033*** |
|
Weight (gram) |
49.8 ± 16.6** |
42.7 ± 13.7** |
0.004*** |
|
Surgeons |
0.977* |
||
|
Surgeon one |
37 |
14 (27.5%)**** |
|
|
Surgeon two |
69 |
28 (28.9%)**** |
|
|
Others |
24 |
10 (29.4%)**** |
|
|
|
|||
|
* Chi square test; ** Mean ± SD; *** Student t-test between negative surgical margin group and positive surgical margin group; **** Positive surgical margin rate for each surgeon in parentheses |
|||
|
Hong et al. Diagnostic Pathology 2012 7:24 doi:10.1186/1746-1596-7-24 |
|||
