Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sentinel node evaluation in prostate cancer

  • Review
  • Published:
Clinical & Experimental Metastasis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) based pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in prostate cancer (PCa) is appealing over the time, cost and morbidity classically attributed to conventional PLND during radical prostatectomy. The initial report of feasibility of the SLN concept in prostate cancer was nearly 20 years ago. However, PLND based on the SLN concept, either SLN biopsy of a single node or targeted SLN dissection of multiple nodes, is still considered investigational in PCa. To better appreciate the challenges, and potential solutions, associated with SLN-based PLND in PCa, this review will discuss the rationale behind PLND in PCa and evaluate current SLN efforts in the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in men in the US.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cabanas R (1977) An approach for the treatment of penile carcinoma. Cancer 39:456–466

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Spiess PE et al (2007) Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and dynamic sentinel node biopsy for staging penile cancer: results with pathological correlation. J Urol 177(6):2157–2161

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Morton D et al (1992) Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 127:392–399

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bilchik AJ et al (1998) Universal application of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy in solid neoplasms. Cancer J Sci Am 4(6):351–358

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nieweg O, Tanis P, Kroon B (2001) The definition of a sentinel node. Ann Surg Oncol 8(6):538–541

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2018) Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68(1):7–30

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wawroschek F et al (1999) The sentinel lymph node concept in prostate cancer - first results of gamma probe-guided sentinel lymph node identification. Eur Urol 36:595–600

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ruijter E et al (1996) Histological grade heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. Biological and clinical implications. J Pathol 180:295–299

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (2015) The molecular taxonomy of primary prostate cancer. Cell 163(4):1011–1025

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brocks D et al (2014) Intratumor DNA methylation heterogeneity reflects clonal evolution in aggressive prostate cancer. Cell Rep 8(3):798–806

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mundbjerg K et al (2017) Identifying aggressive prostate cancer foci using a DNA methylation classifier. Genome Biol 18(1):3

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Carreira S et al (2014) Tumor clone dynamics in lethal prostate cancer. Sci Transl Med 6(254):254ra125

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng L et al (2001) Risk of prostate carcinoma death in patients with lymph node metastasis. Cancer 91(1):66–73

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hofer MD et al (2006) Prognostic factors in lymph node-positive prostate cancer. Urology 67(5):1016–1021

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Boorjian SA et al (2007) Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 178(3 Pt 1):864–870; discussion 870-1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hull G et al (2002) Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1000 consecutive patients. J Urol 167:528–534

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schumacher MC et al (2008) Good outcome for patients with few lymph node metastases after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54(2):344–352

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bishoff J et al (2000) Pelvic lymphadenectomy can be omitted in selected patients with carcinoma of the prostate: development of a system of patient selection. Urology 45(2):270–274

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meng M, Carroll P (2000) When is pelvic lymph node dissection necessary before radical prostatectomy? A decision analysis. J Urol 164:1235–1240

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mclaughlin A et al (1976) Prostatic carcinoma: incidence and location of unsuspected lymphatic metastases. J Urol 115:89–94

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. McDowell G et al (1990) Pelvic lymphadenectomy for staging clinically localized prostate cancer. Urology 35(6):476–482

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Makarov DV et al (2006) Pathological outcomes and biochemical progression in men with T1c prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy with prostate specific antigen 2.6 to 4.0 vs 4.1 to 6.0 ng/ml. J Urol 176(2):554–558

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Han M 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 N Am 28(3):555–565

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Abdollah F et al (2013) Extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer: a 20-year audit in a single center. Ann Oncol 24(6):1459–1466

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Godoy G et al (2012) Pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: frequency and distribution of nodal metastases in a contemporary radical prostatectomy series. J Urol 187(6):2082–2086

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bernstein AN et al (2017) Contemporary incidence & outcomes of prostate cancer lymph node metastases. J Urol 199:1510–1517

    Google Scholar 

  27. Conrad S et al (2002) Prospective validation of an algorithm with systematic sextant biopsy to predict pelvic lymph node metastasis in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 167(2 Pt 1):521–525

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wit EMK et al (2017) Sentinel node procedure in prostate cancer: a systematic review to assess diagnostic accuracy. Eur Urol 71(4):596–605

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Briganti A et al (2006) Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 50(5):1006–1013

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Winter A et al (2014) Sentinel lymph node dissection in more than 1200 prostate cancer cases: rate and prediction of lymph node involvement depending on preoperative tumor characteristics. Int J Urol 21(1):58–63

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Briganti A et al (2009) Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 55(6):1251–1265

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mattei A, Danuser H (2011) Contemporary imaging analyses of pelvic lymph nodes in the prostate cancer patient. Curr Opin Urol 21(3):211–218

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hacker A et al (2006) Detection of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of [18F]fluorocholine positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and laparoscopic radioisotope guided sentinel lymph node dissection. J Urol 176(5):2014–2018; discussion 2018-9

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fortuin AS et al (2018) Ultra-small superparamagnetic iron oxides for metastatic lymph node detection: back on the block. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 10(1):e1471

    Google Scholar 

  35. Maurer T et al (2016) Diagnostic efficacy of (68)gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging for lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 195(5):1436–1443

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Schumacher MC et al (2006) Is pelvic lymph node dissection necessary in patients with a serum PSA < 10 ng/ml undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer? Eur Urol 50(2):272–279

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cagiannos I et al (2003) A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 170(5):1798–1803

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Leyh-Bannurah SR et al (2017) Population-based external validation of the updated 2012 partin tables in contemporary north american prostate cancer patients. Prostate 77(1):105–113

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Briganti A et al (2012) Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol 61(3):480–487

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Buyyounouski MK et al (2017) Prostate cancer - major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin 67(3):245–253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Fuchs W, Böök-Hederström G (1961) Inguinal and pelvic lymphography: a preliminary report. Acta Ragiol 56:340–354

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Gil-Vernet JM (1996) Prostate cancer: anatomical and surgical considerations. Br J Urol 78:161–168

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Flocks R, Culp D, Porto R (1959) Lymphatic spread from prostate cancer. J Urol 81(1):194–196

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Briganti A et al (2012) Lymphatic spread of nodal metastasis in high-risk prostate cancer: the ascending pathway from pelvis to the retroperitoneum. Prostate 72:186–192

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Park JM et al (1994) Pathways of nodal metastasis from pelvic tumors: CT demonstration. RadioGraphic 14:1309–1321

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Golimbu M et al (1979) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostatic cancer. J Urol 121(5):617–620

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Mattei A et al (2008) The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol 53(1):118–125

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Joniau S et al (2013) Mapping of pelvic lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 63(3):450–458

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Raghavaiah NV, Jordan WP Jr (1979) Prostatic lymphography. J Urol 121(2):178–181

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Smith M (1966) The lymphatics of the prostate. Invest Urol 3(5):439–444

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Byar D, Mostofi FK (1972) Carcinoma of the prostate: prognostic evaluation of certain pathologic features in 208 radical prostatectomies. Examined by the step-section technique. Cancer 30(1):5–13

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Pierorazio PM et al (2013) Pathological and oncologic outcomes for men with positive lymph nodes at radical prostatectomy: the Johns Hopkins Hospital 30-year experience. Prostate 73(15):1673–1680

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Weckermann D et al (2007) Reliability of preoperative diagnostics and location of lymph node metastases in presumed unilateral prostate cancer. BJU Int 99(5):1036–1040

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Harrison SH et al (1992) Correlation between side of palpable tumor and side of pelvic lymph node metastasis in clinically localized prostate cancer. Cancer 69(3):750–754

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Heck MM et al (2014) Topography of lymph node metastases in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and extended lymphadenectomy: results of a combined molecular and histopathologic mapping study. Eur Urol 66(2):222–229

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Heidenreich A, Ohlmann CH, Polyakov S (2007) Anatomical extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 52(1):29–37

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Winfield HN et al (1991) Urological laparoscopic surgery. J Urol 146(4):941–948

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Schuessler WW et al (1991) Transperitoneal endosurgical lymphadenectomy in patients with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 145(5):988–991

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Touijer K et al (2007) Standard versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer in patients with a predicted probability of nodal metastasis greater than 1%. J Urol 178(1):120–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Rousseau C et al (2014) Laparoscopic sentinel lymph node versus hyperextensive pelvic dissection for staging clinically localized prostate carcinoma: a prospective study of 200 patients. J Nucl Med 55(5):753–758

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Fukuda M et al (2007) Detection of sentinel node micrometastasis by step section and immunohistochemistry in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 177(4):1313–1317; discussion 1317

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von R, Knobloch (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167(4):1681–1686

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ganswindt U et al (2011) Distribution of prostate sentinel nodes: a SPECT-derived anatomic atlas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79(5):1364–1372

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. NCCN, National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines: prostate cancer (version 2.2018). https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf

  65. Clark T et al (2003) Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169(1):145–147; discussion 147–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Messing EM et al (1999) Immediate hormonal therapy compared with observation after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with node-positive prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 341(24):1781–1788

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Hanks GE et al (1998) Ten-year outcomes for pathologic node-positive patients treated in RTOG 75-06. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 40(4):765–768

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Moschini M et al (2016) Natural history of clinical recurrence patterns of lymph node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 69(1):135–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Nini A et al (2015) Patterns of clinical recurrence of node-positive prostate cancer and impact on long-term survival. Eur Urol 68(5):777–784

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Preisser F et al (2018) Extent of lymph node dissection improves survival in prostate cancer patients treated with radical prostatectomy without lymph node invasion. Prostate 78(6):469–475

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Davies JD et al (2013) Anatomic basis for lymph node counts as measure of lymph node dissection extent: a cadaveric study. Urology 81(2):358–363

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kluth LA et al (2014) Does increasing the nodal yield improve outcomes in contemporary patients without nodal metastasis undergoing radical prostatectomy? Urol Oncol 32(1):47.e1–47.e8

    Google Scholar 

  73. 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(5):1891–1894

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. DiMarco DS et al (2005) The extent of lymphadenectomy for pTXNO prostate cancer does not affect prostate cancer outcome in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 173(4):1121–1125

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Schroder F et al (2004) Early versus delayed endocrine treatment of pN1-3 M0 prostate cancer without local treatment of the primary tumor: results of European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer 30846: a phase III study. J Urol 172(3):923–927

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Kramer SA et al (1981) Prognosis of patients with stage D1 prostatic adenocarcinoma. J Urol 125(6):817–819

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Seay TM, ML B, Zincke H (1998) Long-term outcome in patients with pTxN+ adenocarcinoma of prostate treated with radical prostatectomy and early androgen ablation. J Urol 159(2):357–364

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Briganti A et al (2009) Two positive nodes represent a significant cut-off value for cancer specific survival in patients with node positive prostate cancer. A new proposal based on a two-institution experience on 703 consecutive N+ patients treated with radical prostatectomy, extended pelvic lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy. Eur Urol 55(2):261–270

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Daneshmand S et al (2004) Prognosis of patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: long-term results. J Urol 172(6 Pt 1):2252–2255

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Bader P 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(3):849–854

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Bandini M et al (2018) Contemporary trends and survival outcomes after aborted radical prostatectomy in lymph node metastatic prostate cancer patients. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.01.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Engel J et al (2010) Survival benefit of radical prostatectomy in lymph node-positive patients with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 57(5):754–761

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Gervasoni JE Jr, Sbayi S, Cady B (2007) Role of lymphadenectomy in surgical treatment of solid tumors: an update on the clinical data. Ann Surg Oncol 14(9):2443–2462

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Epstein JI et al (1986) Frozen section detection of lymph node metastases in prostatic carcinoma: accuracy in grossly uninvolved pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. J Urol 136(6):1234–1237

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Campbell SC et al (1995) Open pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: a reassessment. Urology 46(3):352–355

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Yuh BE et al (2013) Standardized comparison of robot-assisted limited and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 112(1):81–88

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Wilson TG et al (2015) Best practices in robot-assisted radical cystectomy and urinary reconstruction: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol 67(3):363–375

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Ecanow JS et al (2013) Axillary staging of breast cancer: what the radiologist should know. Radiographics 33(6):1589–1612

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Tokuda Y et al (2010) Prostate cancer topography and patterns of lymph node metastasis. Am J Surg Pathol 34(12):1862–1867

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Howard JH et al (2017) Prognostic value of multiple draining lymph node basins in melanoma: a matched-pair analysis based on the John Wayne cancer institute experience. Front Oncol 7:172

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Fukuda H et al (2000) Anatomic distribution of intraprostatic lymphatics: implications for the lymphatic spread of prostate cancer-a preliminary study. Prostate 44(4):322–327

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. van der Poel HG et al (2017) Sentinel node biopsy for prostate cancer: report from a consensus panel meeting. BJU Int 120(2):204–211

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Holl G et al (2009) Validation of sentinel lymph node dissection in prostate cancer: experience in more than 2,000 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36:1377–1382

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Weckermann D et al (2007) Limitations of radioguided surgery in high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 51(6):1549–1556

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Miki J et al (2018) Anatomical localization and clinical impact of sentinel lymph nodes based on patterns of pelvic lymphatic drainage in clinically localized prostate cancer. Prostate 78(6):419–425

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Hruby S et al (2015) Fluorescence guided targeted pelvic lymph node dissection for intermediate and high risk prostate cancer. J Urol 194(2):357–363

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Jeschke S et al (2012) Visualisation of the lymph node pathway in real time by laparoscopic radioisotope- and fluorescence-guided sentinel lymph node dissection in prostate cancer staging. Urology 80(5):1080–1086

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Wawroschek F et al (2003) The influence of serial sections, immunohistochemistry, and extension of pelvic lymph node dissection on the lymph node status in clinically localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 43(2):132–136; discussion 137

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Chennamsetty A et al (2017) Lymph node fluorescence during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with indocyanine green: prospective dosing analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer 15(4):e529–e534

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. KleinJan GH et al (2014) Optimisation of fluorescence guidance during robot-assisted laparoscopic sentinel node biopsy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 66(6):991–998

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Ramirez-Backhaus M et al (2016) Indocyanine green guided pelvic lymph node dissection: an efficient technique to classify the lymph node status of patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy. J Urol 196(5):1429–1435

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Yuh B et al (2012) Robotic extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Eur Urol 61(5):1004–1010

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Weckermann D et al (2007) Sentinel lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: experience with more than 1,000 patients. J Urol 177(3):916–920

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Inoue S et al (2011) Identification of lymphatic pathway involved in the spreading of prostate cancer by fluorescence navigation approach with intraoperatively injected indocyanine green. Can Urol Assoc J 5(4):254–259

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Wawroschek F 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(4):303–310

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Reinhart MB et al (2016) Indocyanine green: historical context, current applications, and future considerations. Surg Innov 23(2):166–175

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Salem CE et al (2006) A preclinical study of prostate sentinel lymph node mapping with [99mTC]diethylenetetramine pentaacetic acid-mannosyl-dextran. J Urol 175(2):744–748

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Knapp DW et al (2007) Sentinel lymph node mapping of invasive urinary bladder cancer in animal models using invisible light. Eur Urol 52(6):1700–1708

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  109. Inoue S et al (2013) Identification of lymphatic pathway involved in the spread of bladder cancer: evidence obtained from fluorescence navigation with intraoperatively injected indocyanine green. Can Urol Assoc J 7(5–6):E322–E328

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. van der Poel HG et al (2011) Intraoperative laparoscopic fluorescence guidance to the sentinel lymph node in prostate cancer patients: clinical proof of concept of an integrated functional imaging approach using a multimodal tracer. Eur Urol 60(4):826–833

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Manny TB, Patel M, Hemal AK (2014) Fluorescence-enhanced robotic radical prostatectomy using real-time lymphangiography and tissue marking with percutaneous injection of unconjugated indocyanine green: the initial clinical experience in 50 patients. Eur Urol 65(6):1162–1168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. van den Berg NS et al (2017) Multispectral fluorescence imaging during robot-assisted laparoscopic sentinel node biopsy: a first step towards a fluorescence-based anatomic roadmap. Eur Urol 72(1):110–117

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Lee HJ et al (2017) Fluorescence-based molecular imaging of porcine urinary bladder sentinel lymph nodes. J Nucl Med 58:547–553

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Maurer T et al (2015) Prostate-specific membrane antigen-radioguided surgery for metastatic lymph nodes in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 68(3):530–534

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Harke NN et al (2018) Fluorescence-supported lymphography and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized trial. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2330-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Veronesi U et al (2003) A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 349:546–553

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Weckermann D et al (2006) Incidence of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of ≤ 10 ng/mL and biopsy Gleason score of ≤ 6, and their influence on PSA progression-free survival after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 97(6):1173–1178

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. John Wayne Cancer Institute at Providence Saint John’s Health Center, 2200 Santa Monica Blvd, Suite 131, Santa Monica, CA, 90404, USA

    Ramkishen Narayanan & Timothy G. Wilson

Authors
  1. Ramkishen Narayanan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy G. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramkishen Narayanan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narayanan, R., Wilson, T.G. Sentinel node evaluation in prostate cancer. Clin Exp Metastasis 35, 471–485 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10585-018-9936-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10585-018-9936-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation