Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

, Volume 143, Issue 12, pp 2555–2562 | Cite as

Survival benefit of pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in high-grade endometrial carcinoma: a retrospective population-based cohort analysis

  • Thomas Papathemelis
  • S. Scharl
  • K. Kronberger
  • M. Gerken
  • A. Scharl
  • A. Pauer
  • M. Klinkhammer-Schalke
Original Article – Clinical Oncology



The standard therapy for high-grade endometrial cancer is surgery but the therapeutic effects of pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection (LND) are poorly investigated. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated overall survival, recurrence rates and recurrence-free survival among patients with high-grade type I and II endometrial carcinoma who underwent LND.


This study included 284 patients who are recorded in the German Tumor Centre Regensburg form 1998 to 2015 and were selected by cancer grading, the absence of secondary tumors, primary surgery including hysterectomy and available follow-up. 244 of the 284 patients in this cohort were unequivocally classified as R0 after resection.


A significantly increased overall survival was observed for systematic LND of 25 or more paraaortic and pelvic lymph nodes versus patients who did not undergo such intervention (p < 0.001) or had elective LND of 1–24 lymph nodes both in univariable (p = 0.016) and multivariable (p = 0.014) analysis. A similar observation was made for recurrence-free survival of patients in the cohort who underwent complete tumor resection (R0). In addition, a reduced cumulative recurrence rate was observed for patients with systematic LND.


Our study provides evidence that the systematic removal of 25 or more pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes reduces the recurrence rate and that it is beneficial for the long-term overall and recurrence-free survival of patients with high-grade endometrial cancer.


Endometrial cancer Lymphadenectomy Outcome Overall survival Recurrence 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Thomas Papathemelis, Sophia Scharl, Karin Kronberger, Michael Gerken, Anton Scharl, Armin Pauer and Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke all declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

432_2017_2508_MOESM1_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S1. Overall survival of patients with stage FIGO I according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM2_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S2. Overall survival of patients with stage FIGO II according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM3_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S3. Overall survival of patients with stage FIGO III according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM4_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S4. Overall survival of patients with type I G3 carcinoma according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM5_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S5. Overall survival of patients with carcinosarcoma according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM6_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S6. Overall survival of patients with type II carcinoma according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM7_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S7. Cumulative rate of recurrences in R0-resected patients according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM8_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S8. Overall survival of R0-resected patients according to lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM9_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S9. Overall survival according to region of lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM10_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S10. Overall survival according to extension of lymphadenectomy in patients with paraaortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM11_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S11. Overall survival according to extension of lymphadenectomy in patients with pelvic and other lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM12_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S12. Overall survival according to region of lymphadenectomy in patients with systematic lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)
432_2017_2508_MOESM13_ESM.tif (919 kb)
Supplementary material Figure S13. Overall survival according to region of lymphadenectomy in patients with elective lymphadenectomy (TIFF 919 kb)


  1. Barton DPJ, Naik R, Herod J (2009) Efficacy of systemic pelvic LND in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC Trial) A Randomized Study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 19(8):1465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bogani G, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Ghezzi F, Rossetti D, Mariani A (2014) Role of pelvic and para-aortic LND in endometrial cancer: current evidence. J Obs Gynaecol Res 40(2):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bokhman JV (1983) Two pathogenetic types of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 15(1):10–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Colombo N, Preti E, Landoni F, Carinelli S, Colombo A, Marini C et al (2013) Endometrial cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 24 Suppl 6:vi33-8. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt353 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cragun JM, Havrilesky LJ, Calingaert B, Synan I, Secord AA, Soper JT et al (2005) Retrospective analysis of selective LND in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(16):3668–3675CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cramer DW (2012) The epidemiology of endometrial and ovarian cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 26(1):1–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Denschlag D, Ulrich U, Emons G (2010) The diagnosis and treatment of endometrial cancer: progress and controversies. Dtsch Ärzteblatt Int 108(34–35):571–577Google Scholar
  8. Frederick PJ, Straughn JM (2009) The role of comprehensive surgical staging in patients with endometrial cancer. Cancer Control 16(1):23–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Frost JA, Webster KE, Bryant A, Morrison J (2015) LND for the management of endometrial cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9(9):CD007585Google Scholar
  10. Fujimoto T, Nanjyo H, Nakamura A, Yokoyama Y, Takano T, Shoji T et al (2007) Para-aortic LND may improve disease-related survival in patients with multipositive pelvic lymph node stage IIIc endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 107(2):253–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gottwald L, Pluta P, Piekarski J, Spych M, Hendzel K, Topczewska-Tylinska K et al (2010) Long-term survival of endometrioid endometrial cancer patients. Arch Med Sci 6(6):937–944CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. International Agency for Research on Cancer (2014) World Cancer Report 2014. World Health Organization. Chapter 5.12. ISBN 978-92-832-0429-9Google Scholar
  13. Kimmig R, Aktas B, Heubner M (2013) Endometriumkarzinom operative Strategie und adjuvanz: Ein moglicher paradigmenwechsel. Gynakologe 46(5):339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Galli L, Podratz KC (2000) Potential therapeutic role of para-aortic LND in node-positive endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 76(3):348–356CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Morice P, Leary A, Creutzberg C, Abu-Rustum N, Darai E (2016) Endometrial cancer. Lancet 387(10023):1094–1108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Morrow CP, Schlaerth JB (1982) Surgical management of endometrial carcinoma. Clin Obstet Gynecol 25(1):81–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Morton DL, Chan AD (2000) The concept of sentinel node localization: how it started. Semin Nucl Med 30(1):4–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Panici PB, Basile S, Maneschi F, Lissoni AA, Signorelli M, Scambia G et al (2008) systemic pelvic LND vs no LND in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(23):1707–1716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rauh-Hain JA, Del Carmen MG (2010) Treatment for advanced and recurrent endometrial carcinoma: combined modalities. Oncologist 15(8):852–861CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Saso S, Chatterjee J, Georgiou E, Ditri AM, Smith JR, Ghaem-Maghami S (2011) Endometrial cancer. BMJ 343(jul06 2):d3954–d3954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Siewert JR, Böttcher K, Roder JD, Busch R, Hermanek P, Meyer HJ (1993) Prognostic relevance of systemic lymph node dissection in gastric carcinoma. German Gastric Carcinoma Study Group. Br J Surg 80(8):1015–1018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Thaker PH, Sood AK (2017) Molecular oncology in gynecologic cancer. In: Lentz GM, Lobo RA, Gershenson DM, Katz VL (eds) Comprehensive gynecology (6th edn), Mosby. ISBN 978-0-323-06986-1Google Scholar
  23. Todo Y, Kato H, Kaneuchi M, Watari H, Takeda M, Sakuragi N (2010) Survival effect of para-aortic LND in endometrial cancer (SEPAL study): a retrospective cohort analysis. Lancet (Lond Engl) 375(9721):1165–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tumorzentrum Regensburg. Available from: Accessed 10 Oct 2016
  25. Yaegashi N, Ito K, Niikura H (2007) LND for endometrial cancer: is paraaortic LND necessary? Int J Clin Oncol 12(3):176–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FrauenklinikKlinikum St. Marien AmbergAmbergGermany
  2. 2.Klinik und Poliklinik für StrahlentherapieUniversitätsklinikum RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  3. 3.Tumorzentrum RegensburgInstitut für Qualitätssicherung und Versorgungsforschung der Universität RegensburgRegensburgGermany

Personalised recommendations