Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate Cancer.
Laparoscopic
Lymph node dissection
Outcome
Prostate cancer
Robotic
da Vinci
Journal
BMC urology
ISSN: 1471-2490
Titre abrégé: BMC Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968571
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jan 2024
29 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
07
10
2023
accepted:
16
01
2024
medline:
30
1
2024
pubmed:
30
1
2024
entrez:
29
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) in men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a widely used procedure. However, little is known about anatomical site-specific yields and subsequent metastatic patterns in these patients. Data on a consecutive series of 1107 patients undergoing RARP at our centre between 2004 and 2018 were analysed. In men undergoing LN dissection, the internal, external and obturator nodes were removed and sent in separately. We performed an analysis of LN yields in total and for each anatomical zone, patterns of LN metastases and complications. Oncological outcome in pN+ disease was assessed including postoperative PSA persistence and survival. A total of 823 ePLNDs were performed in the investigated cohort resulting in 98 men being diagnosed as pN+ (8.9%). The median (IQR) LN yield was 19 (14-25), 10 (7-13) on the right and 9 (6-12) on the left side (P < 0.001). A median of six (4-8) LNs were retrieved from the external, three (1-6) from the internal iliac artery, and eight (6-12) from the obturator fossa. More men had metastatic LNs on the right side compared to the left (41 vs. 19). Symptomatic lymphoceles occurred exclusively in the ePLND group (2.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.04). Postoperatively, 47 (47.9%) of men with pN+ reached a PSA of < 0.1μg/ml. There was no association between a certain pN+ region and postoperative PSA persistence or BCRFS. The estimated cancer specific survival rate at 5 years was 98.5% for pN+ disease. Robot-assisted laparoscopic ePLND with a high LN yield and low complication rate is feasible. However, we observed an imbalance in more removed and positive LNs on the right side compared to the left. A high rate of postoperative PSA persistence and early recurrence in pN+ patients might indicate a possibly limited therapeutical value of the procedure in already spread disease. Yet, these men demonstrated an excellent survival.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38287319
doi: 10.1186/s12894-024-01409-8
pii: 10.1186/s12894-024-01409-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
24Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Gakis G, Boorjian SA, Briganti A, et al. The role of radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;66:191–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.033
pubmed: 23735200
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on prostate Cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79:243–62.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042
pubmed: 33172724
Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part II: principles of active surveillance, principles of surgery, and follow-up. J Urol. 2022;208:19–25.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002758
pubmed: 35536148
Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2021;79(2):243–62.
Feicke A, Baumgartner M, Talimi S, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: surgical technique and experience with the first 99 cases. Eur Urol. 2009;55:876–83.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.12.006
pubmed: 19101076
Truesdale MD, Lee DJ, Cheetham PJ, Hruby GW, Turk AT, Badani KK. Assessment of lymph node yield after pelvic lymph node dissection in men with prostate cancer: a comparison between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy in the modern era. J Endourol. 2010;24:1055–60.
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0128
pubmed: 20575697
Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T, et al. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate Cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72:84–109.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003
pubmed: 28126351
Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, et al. Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2006;50:1006–13.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.015
pubmed: 16959399
Bivalacqua TJ, Pierorazio PM, Gorin MA, Allaf ME, Carter HB, Walsh PC. Anatomic extent of pelvic lymph node dissection: impact on long-term cancer-specific outcomes in men with positive lymph nodes at time of radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2013;82:653–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.03.086
pubmed: 23987158
Briganti A, Blute ML, Eastham JH, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1251–65.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03.012
pubmed: 19297079
Abdollah F, Gandaglia G, Suardi N, et al. More extensive pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival in patients with node-positive prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;67:212–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.05.011
pubmed: 24882672
Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J, et al. Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation treatment in patients with node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:472–9.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70700-8
pubmed: 16750497
Gupta M, Patel HD, Schwen ZR, Tran PT, Partin AW. Adjuvant radiation with androgen-deprivation therapy for men with lymph node metastases after radical prostatectomy: identifying men who benefit. BJU Int. 2019;123:252–60.
doi: 10.1111/bju.14241
pubmed: 29626845
Yossepowitch O. Curing lymph node metastasis in prostate Cancer: the ongoing Battle between improving surgical quality and tumor biology. Eur Urol Focus. 2017;3:256–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.04.004
pubmed: 28753759
D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Jama. 1998;280:969–74.
doi: 10.1001/jama.280.11.969
pubmed: 9749478
Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol. 2002;168:514–8.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64670-8
pubmed: 12131300
Conti A, Santoni M, Burattini L, et al. Update on histopathological evaluation of lymphadenectomy specimens from prostate cancer patients. World J Urol. 2017;35:517–26.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1752-8
pubmed: 26694187
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2
pubmed: 19638912
IBM. IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2017.
Sagalovich D, Calaway A, Srivastava A, Sooriakumaran P, Tewari AK. Assessment of required nodal yield in a high risk cohort undergoing extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and its impact on functional outcomes. BJU Int. 2013;111:85–94.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11351.x
pubmed: 22823452
van der Poel HG, de Blok W, Tillier C, van Muilekom E. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: nodal dissection results during the first 440 cases by two surgeons. J Endourol. 2012;26:1618–24.
doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0360
pubmed: 22800183
Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR. Incidence of lymphoceles after robot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int. 2011;108:1185–90.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10094.x
pubmed: 21489117
Davis JW, Shah JB, Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs. BJU Int. 2011;108:993–8.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x
pubmed: 21917102
Lallas CD, Pe ML, Thumar AB, et al. Comparison of lymph node yield in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy with that in open radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2011;107:1136–40.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09621.x
pubmed: 20825403
Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, et al. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol. 2008;53:118–25.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.07.035
pubmed: 17709171
Tokuda Y, Carlino LJ, Gopalan A, et al. Prostate cancer topography and patterns of lymph node metastasis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34:1862–7.
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181fc679e
pubmed: 21107093
pmcid: 3414911
Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications-a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65:7–16.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.057
pubmed: 23582879
Touijer KA, Mazzola CR, Sjoberg DD, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Long-term outcomes of patients with lymph node metastasis treated with radical prostatectomy without adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Eur Urol. 2014;65:20–5.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.053
pubmed: 23619390