Advertisement

Der Urologe, Ausgabe A

, Volume 44, Issue 6, pp 645–651 | Cite as

Stellenwert der pelvinen Lymphadenektomie beim klinisch lokalisierten Prostatakarzinom

  • M. Schumacher
  • F. C. Burkhard
  • U. E. StuderEmail author
Leitthema

Zusammenfassung

Der Stellenwert und die Ausdehnung der pelvinen Lymphadenektomie beim klinisch lokalisierten Prostatakarzinom werden weiterhin kontrovers diskutiert. Die Lymphadenektomie stellt jedoch bis heute die einzige Methode für ein exaktes Tumorstaging dar. Es gibt zunehmend Hinweise, dass das Entfernen von allen befallenen Lymphknoten einen positiven Einfluss auf das tumorfreie Überleben und evtl. auf das Gesamtüberleben haben könnte. Aus diesem Grund sollte, wenn eine Lymphadenektomie durchgeführt wird, diese Entlang der V. iliaca externa, in der Fossa obturatoria und beidseits Entlang der A. iliaca interna erfolgen.

Schlüsselwörter

Prostatakarzinom Pelvine Lymphadenektomie Radikale Prostatektomie 

The role of pelvine lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer

Abstract

Lymph node dissection remains the only reliable method for exact staging to date. Extended lymphadenectomy including tissue along the external iliac vein, the obturator fossa, and along the internal iliac vessels should be performed in all patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. There is an increasing amount of data suggesting that removal of all diseased nodes, which contain minimal metastatic disease, may have a positive impact on disease-free and, perhaps, on overall survival. Due to the relatively benign course of the disease, longer follow-up periods are still necessary to make a definitive statement.

Keywords

Prostate cancer Lymph node metastasis Radical prostatectomy 

Notes

Interessenkonflikt:

Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Mathiesen O, Carl J, Bonderup O et al. (1990) Axillary sampling and the risk of erroneous staging of breast cancer. An analysis of 960 consecutive patients. Acta Oncol 29: 721–725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siewert JR, Böttcher K, Stein HJ et al. (1998) Relevant prognostic factors in gastric cancer. Ann Surg 228: 449–461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Friedberg V (1989) Results of 108 exenteration operations in advanced gynecologic cancers. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 49: 423–427PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Caplin S, Cerottini JP, Bosman FT et al. (1998) For patients with Duke’s B (TNM Stage II) colorectal carcinoma, examination of six or fewer lymph nodes is related to poor prognosis. Cancer 82: 666–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mills RD, Turner WH, Fleischmann A et al. (2001) Pelvic lymph node metastases from bladder cancer: outcome in 83 patients after radical cystectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy. J Urol 166: 19–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leissner J, Hohenfellner R, Thüroff JW et al. (2000) Lymphadenectomy in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder; significance for staging and prognosis. Br J Urol 85: 817–823Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM et al (2001) Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin Tables) for the new millennium. Urology 58: 843–848CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wolf JS Jr, Cher M, Dallera M et al. (1995) The use and accuracy of cross-sectional imaging and fine needle aspiration cytology for detection of pelvic lymph node metastases before radical prostatectomy. J Urol 153: 993–999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Paik ML, Scolieri MJ, Brown SL et al. (2000) Limitations of computerized tomography in staging invasive bladder cancer before radical cystectomy. J Urol 163: 1693–1696CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tempany CM, McNeil BJ (2001) Advances in biomedical imaging. Jama 285: 562–567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wawroschek F, Vogt H, Wengenmair H et al. (2003) Prostate lymphoscintigraphy and radio-guided surgery for sentinel lymph node identification in prostate cancer. Technique and results of the first 350 cases. Urol Int 70: 303–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R et al. (2002) Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol 168: 514–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weingaertner K, Ramaswamy A, Bittinger A et al. (1996) Anatomical basis for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: results of an autopsy study and implications for the clinic. J Urol 156: 1969–1971CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stone NN, Stock RG, Unger P (1997) Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: comparison of the extended and modified techniques. J Urol 158: 1891–1894PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heidenreich A, Von Knobloch R, Varga Z et al. (2004) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) — an update on >300 cases. J Urol A 171(312): 1183Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bluestein DL, Bostwick DG, Bergstralh EJ et al. (1994) Eliminating the need for bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in select patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 151: 1315–1320PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petros JA, Catalona WJ (1992) Lower incidence of unsuspected lymph node metastases in 521 consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 147: 1574–1575PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bishoff JT, Reyes A, Thompson IM et al. (1995) Pelvic lymphadenectomy can be omitted in selected patients with carcinoma of the prostate: development of a system of patient selection. Urology 45: 270–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167: 1681–1686CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tenaglia JL, Iannucci M (2004) Extended pelvic lymphadenetomy for the treatment of localized prostate carcinoma. Europ Urol Today 15Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MS et al. (2003) Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169: 145–148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Link RE, Morton RA (2001) Indications for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 28: 491–498PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burkhard FC, Schumacher M, Thalmann GN et al. (2005) Is pelvic lymphadenectomy really necessary in patients with a serum prostate-specific antigen level of <10 ng/ml undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer? BJU Int 95: 275–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jhaveri FM, Zippe CD, Klein EA et al. (1999) Biochemical failure does not predict overall survival after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: 10-year results. Urology 54: 884–890CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Han M, Partin AW, Pound CR et al. (2001) Long-term biochemical disease-free and cancer-specific survival following anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. The 15-year Johns Hopkins experience. Urol Clin North Am 28: 555–565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R et al. (2003) Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J Urol 169: 849–854CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG et al. (2004) Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol 172: 910–914CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Steinberg GD, Epstein JI, Piantadosi S et al. (1990) Management of stage D1 adenocarcinoma of the prostate: the Johns Hopkins experience 1974 to 1987. J Urol 144: 1425–1432PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sgrignoli AR, Walsh PC, Steinberg GD et al. (1994) Prognostic factors in men with stage D1 prostate cancer: identification of patients less likely to have prolonged survival after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 152: 1077–1081PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    deKernion JB, Neuwirth H, Stein A et al. (1990) Prognosis of patients with stage D1 prostate carcinoma following radical prostatectomy with and without early endocrine therapy. J Urol 144: 700–703PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zwergel U, Lehmann J, Wullich B et al. (2004) Lymph node positive prostate cancer: long-term survival data after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 171: 1128–1131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Frazier HA 2nd, Robertson JE, Paulson DF (1994) Does radical prostatectomy in the presence of positive pelvic lymph nodes enhance survival? World J Urol 12: 308–312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cadeddu JA, Partin AW, Epstein JI et al. (1997) Stage D1 (T1–3, N1–3, M0) prostate cancer: a case-controlled comparison of conservative treatment versus radical prostatectomy. Urology 50: 251–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Messing E, Manola J, Sarosdy M et al. (2003) Immediate hormonal therapy compared with observation after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with node positive prostate cancer. Results at 10 years of EST 3886. J Urol 169: 396Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Catalona WJ, Miller DR, Kavoussi LR (1988) Intermediate-term survival results in clinically understaged prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 140: 540–543PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenberger MA et al. (1999) Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. Jama 281: 1591–1597CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Golimbu M, Morales P, Al-Askari S et al. (1979) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostatic cancer. J Urol 121: 617–620PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bader P, Spahn M, Huber R et al. (2004) Limited lymph node dissection in prostate cancer may miss lymph node metastasis and determines outcome of apparently pN0 prostate cancer. Eur Urol A 3(16): 55Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Daneshmand S, Quek ML, Stein JP et al. (2004) Prognosis of patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: long-term results. J Urol 172: 2252–2255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Allaf ME, Palapattu GS, Trock BJ et al. (2004) Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 172: 1840–1844CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dimarco DS, Zincke H, Sebo TJ, Slezak J, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML (2005) The extent of lymphadenectomy for pTXN0 prostate cancer does not affect prostate cancer outcome in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 173: 1121–1125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Di Blasio CJ, Fearn P, Seo HS et al. (2003) Association between number of lymph npdes removed and freedom from disease progression in patients receiving pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy. J Urol A 169(456): 1708Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Palapattu GS, Allaf ME, Trock BJ et al. (2004) Prostate specific antigen progression in men with lymph node metastases following radical prostatectomy: results of long-term followup. J Urol 172: 1860–1864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F et al. (2002) A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 347: 781–789CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hull GW, Rabbani F, Abbas F et al. (2002) Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients. J Urol 167: 528–534CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Schumacher
    • 1
  • F. C. Burkhard
    • 1
  • U. E. Studer
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Urologische UniversitätsklinikInselspitalBern
  2. 2.Urologische UniversitätsklinikInselspitalBern

Personalised recommendations