Safety and feasibility of single-incision radical vulvectomy: a novel approach for the treatment of vulvar cancer.
Lymph node excision
minimally invasive surgical procedures
vulvar neoplasms
Journal
Annals of translational medicine
ISSN: 2305-5839
Titre abrégé: Ann Transl Med
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101617978
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
entrez:
12
3
2021
pubmed:
13
3
2021
medline:
13
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In the process of decreasing the morbidity of wound-related complications after vulvectomy and IL for treating vulvar malignancy, we performed a novel surgical procedure-single-incision radical vulvectomy (SIRV). Here, we share our initial experience and report its safety and feasibility. Patients with advanced local vulvar tumors were sequentially enrolled in this prospective cohort study to undergo SIRV. While performing SIRV, routine radical vulvectomies were performed first. Subsequently, the flaps of the bridge area between the vulvectomy incisions and femoral triangles were separated and the lymph nodes underneath were removed. Anterior working spaces (AWS) before the femoral triangle were then made. The saphenous vein was carefully identified and retained, while the superficial and deep inguinal lymph nodes were removed from the medial to the lateral sides. After careful hemostasis, the wounds were sutured. Patient demographics, clinical data, pathologic data, operation time, node count, and complications were recorded. Ten patients underwent SIRV for vulvar cancer. Average hospital stay was 11.70±3.16 (range, 9-13) days. The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 7.59±3.62 (range, 3-15) and 15.14±3.63 (range, 11-20) for per side or both sides of the groin. Blood loss was ≤35 mL. Three patients developed inguinal lymphoceles and underwent needle aspirations. Two patients had impaired wound healing and achieved healing after dressing change. No other postoperative complications were noted during follow-up. Compared with conventional open inguinal lymphadenectomy (COIL) and video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL), SIRV is a more minimally invasive procedure. Our short-term observations showed that SIRV is safe and feasible and has good future application prospects for vulvar cancer. However, definitive conclusions cannot be made. Therefore, long-term oncologic outcomes and large-scale clinical trials are warranted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In the process of decreasing the morbidity of wound-related complications after vulvectomy and IL for treating vulvar malignancy, we performed a novel surgical procedure-single-incision radical vulvectomy (SIRV). Here, we share our initial experience and report its safety and feasibility.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients with advanced local vulvar tumors were sequentially enrolled in this prospective cohort study to undergo SIRV. While performing SIRV, routine radical vulvectomies were performed first. Subsequently, the flaps of the bridge area between the vulvectomy incisions and femoral triangles were separated and the lymph nodes underneath were removed. Anterior working spaces (AWS) before the femoral triangle were then made. The saphenous vein was carefully identified and retained, while the superficial and deep inguinal lymph nodes were removed from the medial to the lateral sides. After careful hemostasis, the wounds were sutured. Patient demographics, clinical data, pathologic data, operation time, node count, and complications were recorded.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Ten patients underwent SIRV for vulvar cancer. Average hospital stay was 11.70±3.16 (range, 9-13) days. The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 7.59±3.62 (range, 3-15) and 15.14±3.63 (range, 11-20) for per side or both sides of the groin. Blood loss was ≤35 mL. Three patients developed inguinal lymphoceles and underwent needle aspirations. Two patients had impaired wound healing and achieved healing after dressing change. No other postoperative complications were noted during follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with conventional open inguinal lymphadenectomy (COIL) and video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL), SIRV is a more minimally invasive procedure. Our short-term observations showed that SIRV is safe and feasible and has good future application prospects for vulvar cancer. However, definitive conclusions cannot be made. Therefore, long-term oncologic outcomes and large-scale clinical trials are warranted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33708947
doi: 10.21037/atm-20-6077
pii: atm-09-04-320
pmc: PMC7944291
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
320Informations de copyright
2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-6077). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Apr;101(1):140-2
pubmed: 16364412
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018 May;297(5):1277-1283
pubmed: 29520666
Obstet Gynecol. 1981 Nov;58(5):574-9
pubmed: 7301232
Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Sep;110(3):324-8
pubmed: 18582920
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011 Sep-Oct;18(5):644-50
pubmed: 21872170
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Nov;26(9):1706-1711
pubmed: 27575632
Microsurgery. 2017 Sep;37(6):516-524
pubmed: 27273808
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017 Nov;27(9):1983-1989
pubmed: 28885273
J Clin Oncol. 2000 Aug;18(15):2811-6
pubmed: 10920128
J Surg Oncol. 2020 Jul;122(1):96-98
pubmed: 32200552
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Mar;222(3):253-60
pubmed: 26711792
Ann Surg. 1999 Oct;230(4):453-63; discussion 463-5
pubmed: 10522715
Br J Cancer. 2011 Oct 25;105(9):1279-87
pubmed: 21970884
Gynecol Oncol. 1985 Jun;21(2):247-51
pubmed: 3988139
Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;100(6):1159-67
pubmed: 12468158
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Apr;39(4):339-43
pubmed: 23422324
Cancer. 2000 Oct 1;89(7):1520-5
pubmed: 11013366
CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Jan;70(1):7-30
pubmed: 31912902
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Sep;154(3):653-654
pubmed: 31266656
Chin Med J (Engl). 2013 Aug;126(16):3181-3
pubmed: 23981634
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Jul;14(7):2128-32
pubmed: 17473950
World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Nov 14;18(42):6148-54
pubmed: 23155345
Gynecol Oncol. 1981 Feb;11(1):96-101
pubmed: 7203167
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 23;10(10):e0140873
pubmed: 26496391
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1999 Nov;9(6):508-511
pubmed: 11240820
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 Aug;38(8):718-24
pubmed: 22521260
Gynecol Oncol. 2010 May;117(2):308-11
pubmed: 20153883
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Dec;97(12):1427-1437
pubmed: 30063814
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Jan;152(1):94-100
pubmed: 30454877
Cancer. 2002 Dec 1;95(11):2331-8
pubmed: 12436439
Ann Surg. 2017 Jan;265(1):192-196
pubmed: 28009745
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Feb 20;26(6):884-9
pubmed: 18281661
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Sep;163(3):1007-15
pubmed: 2403127
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Oct;128(4):754-60
pubmed: 27607871
Adv Exp Med Biol. 2010;686:285-303
pubmed: 20824452