Skip to main content

Role of lymph node dissection in management of bladder cancer

International Journal of Clinical Oncology volume 16, pages 179–185 (2011)Cite this article

Abstract

Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is the gold standard for treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Recent retrospective series suggest that extended PLND provides a survival benefit, probably by removing undetected micrometastases. There have been several studies suggesting the survival benefit of extended PLND, not only for patients with node-negative disease but also for those who are node positive. The optimal boundaries of PLND seem to be at least up to the level of aortic bifurcation, including Marcille’s fossa, under the present circumstances. Because retrieval of more lymph nodes may help to improve the prognosis of patients, careful approaches should be considered both surgically and pathologically. PLND should be performed for all patients who undergo RC. Prospective randomized studies will give us the answer to the question of whether extended PLND should be performed routinely.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. National Cancer Center. Center for cancer control and information services (2011) Cancer statistics in Japan 2010. http://ganjoho.jp/public/statistics/backnumber/2010_en.html

  2. Tsukamoto T, Kitamura H, Takahashi A et al (2004) Treatment of invasive bladder cancer: lessons from the past and perspective for the future. Jpn J Clin Oncol 34:295–306

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yafi FA, Steinberg JR, Kassouf W (2008) Contemporary management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 13:504–509

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Babjuk M, Oosterlinck W, Sylvester R et al (2008) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 54:303–314

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Herr HW (2003) Extent of surgery and pathology evaluation has an impact on bladder cancer outcomes after radical cystectomy. Urology 61:105–108

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dhar NB, Klein EA, Reuther AM et al (2008) Outcome after radical cystectomy with limited or extended pelvic lymph node dissection. J Urol 179:873–878 (discussion 878)

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fang AC, Ahmad AE, Whitson JM et al (2010) Effect of a minimum lymph node policy in radical cystectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy on lymph node yields, lymph node positivity rates, lymph node density, and survivorship in patients with bladder cancer. Cancer (Phila) 116:1901–1908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Liedberg F, Mansson W (2006) Lymph node metastasis in bladder cancer. Eur Urol 49:13–21

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Roth B, Birkhäuser FD, Zehnder P et al (2011) Readaptation of the peritoneum following extended pelvic lymphadenectomy and cystectomy has a significant beneficial impact on early postoperative recovery and complications: results of a prospective randomized trial. Eur Urol 59:204–210

    Google Scholar 

  10. Herr HW, Faulkner JR, Grossman HB et al (2004) Surgical factors influence bladder cancer outcomes: a cooperative group report. J Clin Oncol 22:2781–2789

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Cote R et al (2001) Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol 19:666–675

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 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 166:19–23

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Leissner J, Ghoneim MA, Abol-Enein H et al (2004) Extended radical lymphadenectomy in patients with urothelial bladder cancer: results of a prospective multicenter study. J Urol 171:139–144

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Vazina A, Dugi D, Shariat SF et al (2004) Stage specific lymph node metastasis mapping in radical cystectomy specimens. J Urol 171:1830–1834

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Abdel-Latif M, Abol-Enein H, El-Baz M (2004) Nodal involvement in bladder cancer cases treated with radical cystectomy: incidence and prognosis. J Urol 172:85–89

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Honma I, Masumori N, Sato E et al (2006) Removal of more lymph nodes may provide better outcome, as well as more accurate pathologic findings, in patients with bladder cancer—analysis of role of pelvic lymph node dissection. Urology 68:543–548

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sherif A, De La Torre M, Malmstrom PU et al (2001) Lymphatic mapping and detection of sentinel nodes in patients with bladder cancer. J Urol 166:812–815

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Liedberg F, Chebil G, Davidsson T et al (2006) Intraoperative sentinel node detection improves nodal staging in invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 175:84–88 (discussion 88–89)

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sherif A, Garske U, de la Torre M et al (2006) Hybrid SPECT-CT: an additional technique for sentinel node detection of patients with invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 50:83–91

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Roth B, Wissmeyer MP, Zehnder P et al (2010) A new multimodality technique accurately maps the primary lymphatic landing sites of the bladder. Eur Urol 57:205–211

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jensen JB, Ulhoi BP, Jensen KM (2010) Lymph node mapping in patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy and lymph node dissection to the level of the inferior mesenteric artery. BJU Int 106:199–205

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lerner SP (2009) The role and extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in the management of patients with invasive urothelial carcinoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol 10:267–274

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Herr H, Lee C, Chang S et al (2004) Standardization of radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection for bladder cancer: a collaborative group report. J Urol 171:1823–1828 (discussion 1827–1828)

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hurle R, Naspro R (2010) Pelvic lymphadenectomy during radical cystectomy: a review of the literature. Surg Oncol 19:208–220

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dangle PP, Gong MC, Bahnson RR (2010) How do commonly performed lymphadenectomy templates influence bladder cancer nodal stage? J Urol 183:499–503

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Stein JP, Cai J, Groshen S (2003) Risk factors for patients with pelvic lymph node metastases following radical cystectomy with en bloc pelvic lymphadenectomy: concept of lymph node density. J Urol 170:35–41

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Herr HW, Bochner BH, Dalbagni G et al (2002) Impact of the number of lymph nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 167:1295–1298

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Leissner J, Hohenfellner R, Thuroff JW et al (2000) Lymphadenectomy in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder; significance for staging and prognosis. BJU Int 85:817–823

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ide H, Kikuchi E, Miyajima A et al (2008) The predictors of local recurrence after radical cystectomy in patients with invasive bladder cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 38:360–364

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Koppie TM, Vickers AJ, Vora K et al (2006) Standardization of pelvic lymphadenectomy performed at radical cystectomy: can we establish a minimum number of lymph nodes that should be removed? Cancer (Phila) 107:2368–2374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Capitanio U, Suardi N, Shariat SF et al (2009) Assessing the minimum number of lymph nodes needed at radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer. BJU Int 103:1359–1362

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jensen JB, Ulhoi BP, Jensen KM (2009) Estimation of the true number of lymph nodes in lymphadenectomy specimens from radical cystectomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 43:288–292

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bochner BH, Herr HW, Reuter VE (2001) Impact of separate versus en bloc pelvic lymph node dissection on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in cystectomy specimens. J Urol 166:2295–2296

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Stein JP, Penson DF, Cai J (2007) Radical cystectomy with extended lymphadenectomy: evaluating separate package versus en bloc submission for node positive bladder cancer. J Urol 177:876–881 (discussion 881–872)

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK (1985) The Will Rogers phenomenon Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 312:1604–1608

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Gofrit ON, Zorn KC, Steinberg GD et al (2008) The Will Rogers phenomenon in urological oncology. J Urol 179:28–33

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wright JL, Lin DW, Porter MP (2008) The association between extent of lymphadenectomy and survival among patients with lymph node metastases undergoing radical cystectomy. Cancer (Phila) 112:2401–2408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Herr HW (2003) Superiority of ratio based lymph node staging for bladder cancer. J Urol 169:943–945

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kassouf W, Agarwal PK, Herr HW et al (2008) Lymph node density is superior to TNM nodal status in predicting disease-specific survival after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: analysis of pooled data from MDACC and MSKCC. J Clin Oncol 26:121–126

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. May M, Herrmann E, Bolenz C et al (2011) Lymph node density affects cancer-specific survival in patients with lymph node-positive urothelial bladder cancer following radical cystectomy. Eur Urol [Epub ahead of print]

  41. Wiesner C, Salzer A, Thomas C (2009) Cancer-specific survival after radical cystectomy and standardized extended lymphadenectomy for node-positive bladder cancer: prediction by lymph node positivity and density. BJU Int 104:331–335

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Osawa T, Abe T, Shinohara N et al (2009) Role of lymph node density in predicting survival of patients with lymph node metastases after radical cystectomy: a multi-institutional study. Int J Urol 16:274–278 discussion 278

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bruins HM, Huang GJ, Cai J et al (2009) Clinical outcomes and recurrence predictors of lymph node positive urothelial cancer after cystectomy. J Urol 182:2182–2187

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Abol-Enein H, El-Baz M, Abd El-Hameed MA et al (2004) Lymph node involvement in patients with bladder cancer treated with radical cystectomy: a patho-anatomical study. A single center experience. J Urol 172:1818–1821

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Holmer M, Bendahl PO, Davidsson T et al (2009) Extended lymph node dissection in patients with urothelial cell carcinoma of the bladder: can it make a difference? World J Urol 27:521–526

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kassouf W, Leibovici D, Munsell MF et al (2006) Evaluation of the relevance of lymph node density in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical cystectomy. J Urol 176:53–57 discussion 57

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Steven K, Poulsen AL (2007) Radical cystectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy: survival of patients with lymph node metastasis above the bifurcation of the common iliac vessels treated with surgery only. J Urol 178:1218–1223 (discussion 1223–1214)

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Baltaci S, Adsan O, Ugurlu O et al (2011) Reliability of frozen section examination of obturator lymph nodes and impact on lymph node dissection borders during radical cystectomy: results of a prospective multicentre study by the Turkish Society of Urooncology. BJU Int 107:547–553

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

N. Masumori received lecture fees from GlaxoSmithKline. T. Tsukamoto received lecture fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Astellas. H. Kitamura has no conflict of interest.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, South 1 West 16, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8543, Japan

    Hiroshi Kitamura, Naoya Masumori & Taiji Tsukamoto

Authors
  1. Hiroshi Kitamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naoya Masumori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Taiji Tsukamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroshi Kitamura.

About this article

Cite this article

Kitamura, H., Masumori, N. & Tsukamoto, T. Role of lymph node dissection in management of bladder cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 16, 179–185 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-011-0235-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-011-0235-1

Keywords

  • Bladder cancer
  • Lymph node dissection
  • Radical cystectomy