Outcomes following radical inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer using a fascial-sparing surgical technique.
Complications
Groin dissection
Morbidity
Penile cancer
Radical inguinal lymphadenectomy
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2023
Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
10
02
2023
accepted:
28
03
2023
medline:
7
6
2023
pubmed:
6
4
2023
entrez:
5
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To describe our surgical technique and report the oncological outcomes and complication rates using a fascial-sparing radical inguinal lymphadenectomy (RILND) technique for penile cancer patients with cN+ disease in the inguinal lymph nodes. Over a 10-year period, 660 fascial-sparing RILND procedures were performed in 421 patients across two specialist penile cancer centres. The technique used a subinguinal incision with an ellipse of skin excised over any palpable nodes. Identification and preservation of the Scarpa's and Camper's fascia was the first step. All superficial inguinal nodes were removed en bloc under this fascial layer with preservation of the subcutaneous veins and fascia lata. The saphenous vein was spared where possible. Patient characteristics, oncologic outcomes and perioperative morbidity were retrospectively collected and analysed. Kaplan-Meier curves estimated the cancer-specific survival (CSS) functions after the procedure. Median (interquartile range, IQR) follow-up was 28 (14-90) months. A median (IQR) number of 8.0 (6.5-10.5) nodes were removed per groin. A total of 153 postoperative complications (36.1%) occurred, including 50 conservatively managed wound infections (11.9%), 21 cases of deep wound dehiscence (5.0%), 104 cases of lymphoedema (24.7%), 3 cases of deep vein thrombosis (0.7%), 1 case of pulmonary embolism (0.2%), and 1 case of postoperative sepsis (0.2%). The 3-year CSS was 86% (95%Confidence Interval [95% CI] 77-96), 83% (95% CI 72-92), 58% (95% CI 51-66), respectively, for the pN1, pN2 and pN3 patients (p < 0.001), compared to a 3-year CSS of 87% (95% CI 84-95) for the pN0 patients. Fascial-sparing RILND offers excellent oncological outcomes whilst decreasing the morbidity rates. Patients with more advanced nodal involvement had poorer survival rates, emphasizing the need for adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37019998
doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04396-x
pii: 10.1007/s00345-023-04396-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1581-1588Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Christodoulidou M, Sahdev V, Houssein S, Muneer A (2015) Epidemiology of penile cancer. Curr Probl Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2015.03.010
doi: 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2015.03.010
pubmed: 26076979
Fankhauser CD, Ayres BE, Issa A, Albersen M, Watkin N, Muneer A et al (2021) Practice patterns among penile cancer surgeons performing dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy and radical inguinal lymph node dissection in men with penile cancer: A eUROGEN survey. Eur Urol open Sci 24:39–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2020.12.009
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2020.12.009
pubmed: 34337494
pmcid: 8317807
Thomas A, Necchi A, Muneer A, Tobias-Machado M, Tran ATH, Van Rompuy A-S et al (2021) Penile cancer. Nat Rev Dis Prim 7(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-021-00246-5
doi: 10.1038/s41572-021-00246-5
pubmed: 33574340
Cakir OO, Schifano N, Venturino L, Pozzi E, Castiglione F, Alnajjar HM et al (2021) Surgical technique and outcomes following coronal-sparing glans resurfacing for benign and malignant penile lesions. Int J Impot Res. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-021-00452-5
doi: 10.1038/s41443-021-00452-5
pubmed: 34635818
Parnham AS, Albersen M, Sahdev V, Christodoulidou M, Nigam R, Malone P et al (2018) Glansectomy and split-thickness skin graft for penile cancer. Eur Urol 73(2):284–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.048
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.048
pubmed: 27746062
Hakenberg S, Compérat OW, Minhas E, Necchi N, Protzel A, Watkin AC, Robinson R (2022) EAU guidelines on Penile Cancer. EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands. http://uroweb.org/guidelines/compilations-of-all-guidelines/ . Accessed 13 Aug 2023
Daseler EH, Anson BJ, Reimann AF (1948) Radical excision of the inguinal and iliac lymph glands; a study based upon 450 anatomical dissections and upon supportive clinical observations. Surg Gynecol Obstet 87(6):679–694
pubmed: 18120502
Johnson DE, Lo RK (1984) Complications of groin dissection in penile cancer. Experience with 101 lymphadenectomies. Urology 24(4):312–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-4295(84)90198-5
doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(84)90198-5
pubmed: 6485189
Stuiver MM, Djajadiningrat RS, Graafland NM, Vincent AD, Lucas C, Horenblas S (2013) Early wound complications after inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer: a historical cohort study and risk-factor analysis. Eur Urol 64(3):486–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.02.037
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.02.037
pubmed: 23490726
Gopman JM, Djajadiningrat RS, Baumgarten AS, Espiritu PN, Horenblas S, Zhu Y et al (2015) Predicting postoperative complications of inguinal lymph node dissection for penile cancer in an international multicentre cohort. BJU Int 116(2):196–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13009
doi: 10.1111/bju.13009
pubmed: 25777366
Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, Compton CC, Gershenwald JE, Brookland RK et al (2017) The eighth edition AJCC cancer staging manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more ‘personalized’ approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin 67(2):93–99. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21388
doi: 10.3322/caac.21388
pubmed: 28094848
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
pubmed: 15273542
pmcid: 1360123
Catalona WJ (1988) Modified inguinal lymphadenectomy for carcinoma of the penis with preservation of saphenous veins: technique and preliminary results. J Urol 140(2):306–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)41589-8
doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)41589-8
pubmed: 3398125
Tobias-Machado M, Tavares A, Molina WRJ, Forseto PHJ, Juliano RV, Wroclawski ER (2006) Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL): minimally invasive resection of inguinal lymph nodes. Int Braz J Urol 32(3):316–321. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-55382006000300012
doi: 10.1590/s1677-55382006000300012
pubmed: 16813678
Sotelo R, Sánchez-Salas R, Carmona O, Garcia A, Mariano M, Neiva G et al (2007) Endoscopic lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma. J Endourol 21(4):364–367. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9971.discussion367
doi: 10.1089/end.2007.9971.discussion367
pubmed: 17451323
Omorphos S, Saad Z, Kirkham A, Nigam R, Malone P, Bomanji J et al (2018) Zonal mapping of sentinel lymph nodes in penile cancer patients using fused SPECT/CT imaging and lymphoscintigraphy. Urol Oncol 36(12):530.e1-530.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.002
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.002
pubmed: 30318180
Micheletti L, Borgno G, Barbero M, Preti M, Cavanna L, Nicolaci P et al (1990) Deep femoral lymphadenectomy with preservation of the fascia lata. Preliminary report on 42 invasive vulvar carcinomas. J Reprod Med 35(12):1130–1133
pubmed: 2283630
Yao K, Tu H, Li Y-H, Qin Z-K, Liu Z-W, Zhou F-J et al (2010) Modified technique of radical inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma: morbidity and outcome. J Urol 184(2):546–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.140
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.140
pubmed: 20620415
Yao K, Zou Z, Li Z, Zhou F, Qin Z, Liu Z et al (2013) Fascia lata preservation during inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: rationale and outcome. Urology 82(3):642–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.05.021
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.05.021
pubmed: 23876593
Tsaur I, Biegel C, Gust K, Huesch T, Borgmann H, Brandt MPJK et al (2015) Feasibility, complications and oncologic results of a limited inguinal lymph node dissection in the management of penile cancer. Int Braz J Urol 41(3):486–495. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0304
doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0304
pubmed: 26200541
pmcid: 4752141
Micheletti L, Levi AC, Bogliatto F (1998) Anatomosurgical implications derived from an embryological study of the Scarpa’s triangle with particular reference to groin lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol 70(3):358–364. https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1998.5073
doi: 10.1006/gyno.1998.5073
pubmed: 9790788
Hegarty PK, Dinney CP, Pettaway CA (2010) Controversies in ilioinguinal lymphadenectomy. Urol Clin North Am 37(3):421–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2010.04.005
doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2010.04.005
pubmed: 20674697
Koifman L, Hampl D, Koifman N, Vides AJ, Ornellas AA (2013) Radical open inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma: surgical technique, early complications and late outcomes. J Urol 190(6):2086–2092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.016
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.016
pubmed: 23770135