Laparoscopically assisted ilio-inguinal lymph node dissection versus inguinal lymph node dissection in melanoma.
comparative effectiveness
hospital stay
lymph node
minimally invasive therapy
oncology
postoperative complications
quality of life
skin (melanoma)
surgery
Journal
Melanoma management
ISSN: 2045-0885
Titre abrégé: Melanoma Manag
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101649842
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Jul 2020
21 Jul 2020
Historique:
entrez:
22
8
2020
pubmed:
22
8
2020
medline:
22
8
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Morbidity of open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL) is high. We use laparoscopy for pelvic time, preservation of the greater saphenous vein and transverse inguinal incisions (laparoscopically assisted ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy, LIIL) to improve postoperative outcomes. Retrospective comparison of 14 patients who underwent LIIL and seven patients who underwent OIL. Fourteen LIIL compared with seven OIL showed a statistically significant reduction in morbidity (15.3 vs 75%) and hospital stay (7 vs 15.7 days). Pelvic lymph node involvement (27%) was not detected preoperatively. With a mean follow-up of 36.2 (range: 3-137) months, local recurrence rate was 58.3% in LIIL and 40% in OIL. Overall survival was significantly higher in OIL than in LIIL. Compared with OIL, LIIL reduced postoperative complications and hospital stay.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32821374
doi: 10.2217/mmt-2019-0023
pmc: PMC7426774
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Langues
eng
Pagination
MMT42Informations de copyright
© 2020 Enrique Boldo.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Financial & competing interests disclosure The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.
Références
Am J Surg. 1986 Nov;152(5):491-5
pubmed: 3777327
J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2016 Dec;50(6):315-320
pubmed: 27146716
J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2013 Sep;47(4):248-51
pubmed: 23627646
J Am Coll Surg. 2014 Jul;219(1):101-8
pubmed: 24726566
Br J Surg. 2016 Jul;103(8):1026-32
pubmed: 27146356
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Sep;18(9):2521-8
pubmed: 21556951
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 8;376(23):2211-2222
pubmed: 28591523
JAMA Surg. 2014 Jul;149(7):700-6
pubmed: 24804856
Curr Oncol. 2017 Aug;24(4):e323-e327
pubmed: 28874902
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Nov;18(12):3300-8
pubmed: 21537867
Clin Exp Metastasis. 2012 Oct;29(7):699-706
pubmed: 22729520
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Mar;17(3):731-7
pubmed: 20183910
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Feb;18(2):306-8
pubmed: 21161723
Br J Surg. 2018 Jan;105(1):96-105
pubmed: 29095479
Ann Surg. 2017 Jan;265(1):192-196
pubmed: 28009745
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Jun;17(6):757-767
pubmed: 27161539
Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jan;20(1):340-5
pubmed: 22875645
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019 Sep;45(9):1712-1716
pubmed: 31056364