Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Virchows Archiv Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prostate cancer volume correlates with stage, grade, and progression after prostatectomy. When tumor volume is measured planimetrically, results are multiplied by a correction factor to compensate for tissue shrinkage caused by processing. Injection of formalin into prostatectomy specimens was suggested for improved fixation. Our aim was to investigate how this affects the prostate volume. We studied 142 radical prostatectomy specimens. All prostates were immersed in 10% formalin. In 84 prostates (59%) we also injected 20 ml of formalin before routine fixation. The prostates were weighed unfixed after injection and after final fixation. The specimens were sliced and totally embedded. The transverse diameters of the prostates were measured on unfixed specimens and microscopic sections. The average weight loss after final fixation was 5.8 and 8.6% for formalin-injected specimens and standard-fixed specimens, respectively (p<0.001). However, when total shrinkage was estimated from the transverse diameters, there was no difference related to fixation technique (p=0.59). The average linear shrinkage was 4.5%, corresponding to a volume correction factor of 1.15. We conclude that formalin injection for fixation of prostate tissue does not influence tumor volume calculation compared to conventional fixation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Blackwell KL, Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Zincke H, Oesterling JE (1994) Combining prostate specific antigen with cancer and gland volume to predict more reliably pathological stage: the influence of prostate specific antigen cancer density. J Urol 151:1565–1570

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Boswick DG, Graham SDJ, Napalkov P, Abrahamsson PA, di Sant’agnese PA, Algaba F, Hoisaeter PA, Lee F, Littrup P, Mostofi FK, Denis L, Schroeder F, Murphy GP (1993) Staging of early prostate cancer: a proposed tumor volume-based prognostic index. Urology 41:403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cupp MR, Bostwick DG, Myers RP, Oesterling JE (1995) The volume of prostate cancer in the biopsy specimen cannot reliably predict the quantity of cancer in the radical prostatectomy specimen on an individual basis. J Urol 153:1543–1548

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. De Marzo AM, Fedor H, Gage WR, Rubin MA (2002) Inadequate formalin fixation decreases reliability of p27Kip1 immunohistochemical staining: probing optimal fixation time using high-density tissue microarrays. Human Pathol 33:756–760

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. DeMarzo AM, Nelson WG, Isaacs WB, Epstein JI (2003) Pathological and molecular aspects of prostate cancer. Lancet 361:955–964

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Epstein JI, Oesterling JE, Walsh PC (1988) Tumor volume versus percentage of specimen involved by tumor correlated with progression in stage A prostatic cancer. J Urol 139:980–984

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Epstein JI, Carmichael M, Partin AW, Walsh PC (1993) Is tumor volume an independent predictor of progression following radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis of 185 clinical stage B adenocarcinomas of the prostate with 5 years of follow up. J Urol 149:1478–1481

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB (1994) Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 271:368–374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Greene DR, Egawa S, Neerhut G, Flanagan W, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (1991) The distribution of residual cancer in radical prostatectomy specimens in stage A prostate cancer. J Urol 145:324–329

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Häggarth L, Busch C, Norberg M, Häggman M, Norlen BJ, Egevad L (2005) Prediction of the volume of large prostate cancers by multiple core biopsies. Scand J Urol Nephrol 39:380–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Häggman M, Nybacka O, Nordin B, Busch C (1994) Standardized in vitro mapping with multiple core biopsies of total prostatectomy specimens: localization and prediction of tumour volume and grade. Br J Urol 74:617–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hoedemaeker RF, Ruijter ET, Ruizeveld-de Winter JA, van der Kaa CA, the Biomed II MPC Study Group, van der Kwast TH (1998) Processing radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol Pathol 9:211–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Humphrey PA (1993) Complete histologic serial sectioning of a prostate gland with adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 17:468–472

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Humphrey PA, Walther PJ, Currin SM, Vollmer RT (1991) Histologic grade, DNA ploidy, and intraglandular tumor extent as indicators of tumor progression of clinical stage B prostatic carcinoma. A direct comparison. Am J Surg Pathol 15:1165–1170

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kikuchi E, Scardino PT, Wheeler TM, Slawin KM, Ohori M (2004) Is tumor volume an independent prognostic factor in clinically localized prostate cancer? J Urol 172:508–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lerner SE, Blute ML, Zincke H (1996) Risk factors for progression in patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy. Semin Urol Oncol 14:12–20; discussion 21

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. McNeal JE (1992) Cancer volume and site of origin of adenocarcinoma in the prostate: relationship to local and distant spread. Hum Pathol 23:258–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McNeal JE (1997) Prostate cancer volume. Am J Surg Pathol 21:1392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. McNeal JE, Bostwick DG, Kindrachuk RA, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA (1986) Patterns of progression in prostate cancer. Lancet 1:60–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Miller GJ (1989) Histopathology of prostate cancer: prediction of malignant behavior and correlation with ultrasonography. Urology 33:18–26

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CE (2000) Assessment of morphometric measurements of prostate carcinoma volume. Cancer 89:1056–1064

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Norberg M, Holmberg L, Wheeler T, Magnusson A (1994) Five year follow-up after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer-a study of the impact of different tumor variables on progression. Scand J Urol Nephrol 28:391–399

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Partin AW, Epstein JI, Cho KR, Gittlesohn AM, Walsh PC (1989) Morphometric measurement of tumor volume and percent of gland involvement as predictors of pathological stage in clinical stage B prostate cancer. J Urol 141:341–345

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Schmid H-P, McNeal JE (1992) An abbreviated standard procedure for accurate tumor volume estimation in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 16:184–191

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Schned AR, Wheeler KJ, Hodorowski K, Heaney JA, Ernstoff MS, Amdur RJ, Harris RD (1996) Tissue-shrinkage correction factor in the calculation of prostate cancer volume. Am J Surg Pathol 20:1501–1506

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, Redwine E (1988) Morphometric and clinical studies on 68 consecutive radical prostatectomies. J Urol 139:1235–1241

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM, Sigal BM, Johnstone IM (1999) Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer. JAMA 281:1395–1400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We thank the laboratory technicians Ingeborg May and Ulf Hörnberg for excellent assistance with the handling of prostatectomy specimens.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 171 76, Sweden

    Sara Jonmarker, Alexander Valdman, Anna Lindberg & Lars Egevad

  2. Department of Urology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

    Magnus Hellström

Authors
  1. Sara Jonmarker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Valdman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anna Lindberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Magnus Hellström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lars Egevad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Egevad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonmarker, S., Valdman, A., Lindberg, A. et al. Tissue shrinkage after fixation with formalin injection of prostatectomy specimens. Virchows Arch 449, 297–301 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-006-0259-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-006-0259-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation