Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Operative Therapie von Metastasen beim Peniskarzinom – gibt es eine wissenschaftliche Grundlage?

Surgical treatment of metastatic penile cancer – what is the scientific rationale?

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Therapie von Metastasen des Peniskarzinoms hat einen großen Stellenwert beim Vorliegen von Lymphknotenmetastasen. Eine begrenzte Lymphknotenmetastasierung bietet die Chance der Heilung, wenn eine komplette Entfernung aller Lymphknoten der betroffenen Region durchgeführt wird. Eine adjuvante Therapie mittels Chemotherapie wird empfohlen. Diese Vorgehensweise bezieht sich auf die regionären Lymphknoten der inguinalen und der pelvinen Region. Die Anwendung bei Vorliegen retroperitonealer Lymphknotenmetastasen kann im Einzelfall sinnvoll sein. Je ausgedehnter die Lymphknotenmetastasierung ist, desto schlechter ist die Prognose.

Abstract

The treatment of metastases of penile cancer is confined to lymphatic metastases. Limited lymph node metastasis in penile cancer can be cured by radical lymph node surgery if complete removal of all lymph nodes of the region is achieved. Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended. This approach applies to the regional lymph nodes of the inguinal and pelvic regions. Applying this concept to retroperitoneal lymph node metastases may also be reasonable in selected cases. The individual prognosis depends on the extent of lymphatic spread.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Hakenberg OW et al (2015) EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update. Eur Urol 67(1):142–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2016) TNM classification of malignant tumours. Wiley Blackwell, Oxford, S 18–190

    Google Scholar 

  3. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schwentner C et al (2013) Endoscopic inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy – extended follow-up. J Endourol 27(4):497–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lughezzani G et al (2014) The relationship between characteristics of inguinal lymph nodes and pelvic lymph node involvement in penile squamous cell carcinoma: a single institution experience. J Urol 191(4):977–982

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pizzocaro G, Piva L (1988) Adjuvant and neoadjuvant vincristine, bleomycin, and methotrexate for inguinal metastases from squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. Acta Oncol 27(6):823–824

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sharma P et al (2015) Adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival in pelvic node-positive penile cancer after lymph node dissection: a multi-institutional study. Urol Oncol 33(11):496.e17–496.e23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pettaway CA et al (2010) Tretament of visceral, unresectable or bulky/unresectable regional metastases of penile cancer. Urology 76(2 Suppl 1):S58–S65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kulkarni JN, Kamat MR (1994) Prophylactic bilateral groin node dissection versus prophylactic radiotherapy and surveillance in patients with N0 and N1-2 A carcinoma of the penis. Eur Urol 26(2):123–128

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Franks KN et al (2011) Radiotherapy for node positive penile cancer: experience of the Leeds teaching hospitals. J Urol 186(2):524–529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Burt LM, Shrieve DC, Tward JD (2014) Stage presentation, care patterns, and treatment outcomes for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 88(1):94–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Protzel C, Hakenberg OW (2009) Chemotherapy in patients with penile carcinoma. Urol Int 82(1):1–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pizzocaro G, Nicolai N, Milani A (2009) Taxanes in combination with cisplatin and fluorouracil for advanced penile cancer: preliminary results. Eur Urol 55(3):546–551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hakenberg OW et al (2006) Cisplatin, methotrexate and bleomycin for treating advanced penile carcinoma. BJU Int 98(6):1225–1227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland

    O. W. Hakenberg & C. Protzel

Authors
  1. O. W. Hakenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Protzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. W. Hakenberg.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

O. W. Hakenberg und C. Protzel geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hakenberg, O.W., Protzel, C. Operative Therapie von Metastasen beim Peniskarzinom – gibt es eine wissenschaftliche Grundlage?. Urologe 56, 624–626 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-017-0358-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-017-0358-8

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation