Robot-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomy: preliminary experience and perioperative outcomes from an Italian referral center.
complications
dermal ducts carcinoma
inguinal lymphadenectomy
melanoma
merkel cell carcinoma
penile cancer
robotics
squamous cell carcinoma
Journal
Therapeutic advances in urology
ISSN: 1756-2872
Titre abrégé: Ther Adv Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101487328
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
20
08
2019
accepted:
17
02
2020
entrez:
15
4
2020
pubmed:
15
4
2020
medline:
15
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Inguinal lymphadenectomy remains the gold standard for the treatment of inguinal lymph node metastases from penile carcinoma, melanoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). This procedure is associated with significant complications. In order to reduce morbidity, minimally invasive approaches have been described. We report our preliminary experience with robot-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomies (RAIL). RAIL was performed according to the Sotelo technique. When indicated, a robot-assisted pelvic lymphadenectomy (RAPLND) was performed. We recorded age, sex, comorbidities, baseline oncologic diagnosis, operative time, hospital stay, lymph node yield, complications, time to drain removal, and oncologic outcomes. From December 2016 to February 2019, 13 patients underwent RAIL. Median age was 65 years (range: 31-85 years). Primary malignancy was melanoma in five patients, Merkel cell carcinoma in four, dermal duct tumor in one, penile cancer in two, and SCC in one. RAIL was monolateral in 12 cases and bilateral in 1 case. A total of 10 monolateral RAPLNDs were performed; median operative time was 279 min (range: 169-320). Median lymph nodes yield was 11 (range: 2-24) for monolateral RAIL and 9 for monolateral RAPLND (range 2-24). Median hospital stay was 4 days (range: 2-5). No procedure was converted to open. Median follow up was 16 months (range: 5-31). Five Clavien-Dindo grade I complications were recorded. Median time to drain removal was 32.5 days (range 7-65). Three recurrences and two cancer-related deaths were recorded. RAIL is feasible and associated with a short hospital stay, with little incidence of perioperative complications.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Inguinal lymphadenectomy remains the gold standard for the treatment of inguinal lymph node metastases from penile carcinoma, melanoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). This procedure is associated with significant complications. In order to reduce morbidity, minimally invasive approaches have been described. We report our preliminary experience with robot-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomies (RAIL).
METHODS
METHODS
RAIL was performed according to the Sotelo technique. When indicated, a robot-assisted pelvic lymphadenectomy (RAPLND) was performed. We recorded age, sex, comorbidities, baseline oncologic diagnosis, operative time, hospital stay, lymph node yield, complications, time to drain removal, and oncologic outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
From December 2016 to February 2019, 13 patients underwent RAIL. Median age was 65 years (range: 31-85 years). Primary malignancy was melanoma in five patients, Merkel cell carcinoma in four, dermal duct tumor in one, penile cancer in two, and SCC in one. RAIL was monolateral in 12 cases and bilateral in 1 case. A total of 10 monolateral RAPLNDs were performed; median operative time was 279 min (range: 169-320). Median lymph nodes yield was 11 (range: 2-24) for monolateral RAIL and 9 for monolateral RAPLND (range 2-24). Median hospital stay was 4 days (range: 2-5). No procedure was converted to open. Median follow up was 16 months (range: 5-31). Five Clavien-Dindo grade I complications were recorded. Median time to drain removal was 32.5 days (range 7-65). Three recurrences and two cancer-related deaths were recorded.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
RAIL is feasible and associated with a short hospital stay, with little incidence of perioperative complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32284736
doi: 10.1177/1756287220913386
pii: 10.1177_1756287220913386
pmc: PMC7132788
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Langues
eng
Pagination
1756287220913386Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Références
Eur Urol. 2015 Jan;67(1):142-150
pubmed: 25457021
Transl Androl Urol. 2017 Oct;6(5):826-832
pubmed: 29184779
J Robot Surg. 2016 Dec;10(4):369-372
pubmed: 27173971
BJU Int. 2015 Aug;116(2):196-201
pubmed: 25777366
BJU Int. 2013 Jun;111(7):1068-74
pubmed: 23551693
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Ecancermedicalscience. 2013 Sep 26;7:356
pubmed: 24101945
J Urol. 2018 Jun;199(6):1518-1525
pubmed: 29307685
BJU Int. 2017 Apr;119(4):530-534
pubmed: 27628265
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016 Nov;26(11):845-849
pubmed: 27243665
J Robot Surg. 2019 Feb;13(1):1-8
pubmed: 29730734