Abstract
Purpose
Describe the outcomes and complications of patients who underwent standard pelvic lymphadenectomy (SPLND) and extended PLND (EPLND), or who did not undergo PLND (non-PLND) at the time of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected longitudinal data of 492 RALPs performed by a single surgeon (Kane) over a 5-year period. Patients are subdivided into three treatment groups: 54 EPLND; 231 SPLND; and 207 non-PLND. Indications for EPLND include Gleason score ≥8, PSA ≥10 ng/mL, and higher D’Amico risk group. Patient demographics, perioperative complications, and short-term oncologic outcomes are compared.
Results
Patients who underwent EPLND had higher-risk prostate cancer as evidenced by higher mean PSA (8.5 ng/mL), biopsy Gleason sum (≥8) (57.7 %), and D’Amico risk group (75.9 %), compared to SPLND and/or non-PLND groups (p ≤ 0.001). The EPLND total lymph node yield was similar compared to SPLND (20 vs. 18; p = 0.070). When the EPLND (n = 41) and SPLND (n = 57) were examined among only high-risk patients, the lymph node (IQR) yields [20 (14–29) vs. 17 (12–23)] and the proportion of positive nodes [29.3 % (12/41) vs. 12.3 % (7/57)] differed significantly (p = 0.048 and p = 0.042, respectively). Complication rates for all groups were similar and lymphocele formation was 5 %; 2.5 % were clinically significant.
Conclusions
Robotic PLND can be performed with nodal yield comparable to open or laparoscopic PLND. Robotic EPLND improves nodal yield and the proportion of high-risk patients with nodal metastases recognized. Robotic PLND is associated with an approximately 5 % lymphocele rate. There is no difference in complications between EPLND and SPLND.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Messing EM, Manola J, Sarosdy M, Wilding G, Crawford ED, Trump D (1999) Immediate hormonal therapy compared with observation after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with node-positive prostate cancer. New Eng J Med 341:1781–1788. doi:10.1056/NEJM199912093412401
Wagner M, Sokoloff M, Daneshmand S (2008) The role of pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer–therapeutic? J Urol 179:408–413. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.027
Joslyn SA, Konety BR (2006) Impact of extent of lymphadenectomy on survival after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Urology 68:121–125. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.055
McDowell GC 2nd, Johnson JW, Tenney DM, Johnson DE (1990) Pelvic lymphadenectomy for staging clinically localized prostate cancer. Indications, complications, and results in 217 cases. Urology 35:476–482
Zorn KC, Katz MH, Bernstein A, Shikanov SA, Brendler CB, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL (2009) Pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: assessing nodal yield, perioperative outcomes, and complications. Urology 74:296–302. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.01.077
Bishoff JT, Reyes A, Thompson IM, Harris MJ, St Clair SR, Gomella L, Butzin CA (1995) Pelvic lymphadenectomy can be omitted in selected patients with carcinoma of the prostate: development of a system of patient selection. Urology 45:270–274
Roehl KA, Han M, Ramos CG, Antenor JA, Catalona WJ (2004) Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3,478 consecutive patients: long-term results. J Urol 172:910–914. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000134888.22332.bb
Abdollah F, Sun M, Suardi N, Gallina A, Capitanio U, Bianchi M, Tutolo M, Passoni N, Karakiewicz PI, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Briganti A (2012) National comprehensive cancer network practice guidelines 2011: need for more accurate recommendations for pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. J Urol 188:423–428. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.03.129
Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE (2003) Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J Urol 169:849–854. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000049032.38743.c7
Hu JC, Prasad SM, Gu X, Williams SB, Lipsitz SR, Nguyen PL, Choueiri TK, Choi WW, D’Amico AV (2011) Determinants of performing radical prostatectomy pelvic lymph node dissection and the number of lymph nodes removed in elderly men. Urology 77:402–406. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2010.05.015
Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Suardi N, Gallina A, Da Pozzo LF, Roscigno M, Zanni G, Valiquette L, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI (2006) Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Euro Urol 50:1006–1013. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.015
Feifer AH, Elkin EB, Lowrance WT, Denton B, Jacks L, Yee DS, Coleman JA, Laudone VP, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2011) Temporal trends and predictors of pelvic lymph node dissection in open or minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Cancer 117:3933–3942. doi:10.1002/cncr.25981
Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE (2002) Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol 168:514–518 discussion 518
Touijer KA, Ahallal Y, Guillonneau BD (2012) Indications for and anatomical extent of pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: practice patterns of uro-oncologists in North America. Urol Oncol. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2012.04.021
Network NCC (2011) NCCN guidelines in oncology. Prostate Cancer (v1.2011). http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp
Weingartner K, Ramaswamy A, Bittinger A, Gerharz EW, Voge D, Riedmiller H (1996) Anatomical basis for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: results of an autopsy study and implications for the clinic. J Urol 156:1969–1971
Yee DS, Katz DJ, Godoy G, Nogueira L, Chong KT, Kaag M, Coleman JA (2010) Extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical technique and initial experience. Urology 75:1199–1204. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.06.103
Yuh BE, Ruel NH, Mejia R, Wilson CM, Wilson TG (2012) Robotic extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. Euro Urol 61:1004–1010. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.048
Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, Warncke SH, Thalmann GN, Krause T, Studer UE (2008) The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Euro Urol 53:118–125. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.07.035
Capitanio U, Pellucchi F, Gallina A, Briganti A, Suardi N, Salonia A, Abdollah F, Di Trapani E, Jeldres C, Cestari A, Karakiewicz PI, Montorsi F (2011) How can we predict lymphorrhoea and clinically significant lymphocoeles after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy? Clinical implications. BJU Int 107:1095–1101. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09580.x
Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR (2011) Incidence of lymphoceles after robot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int 108:1185–1190. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10094.x
Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, Mottet N, Schmid HP, van der Kwast T, Wiegel T, Zattoni F (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Euro Urol 59:61–71. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10.039
Association AU (2007) Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. http://www.auanet.org/content/guidelines-and-quality-care/clinical-guidelines/main-reports/proscan07/content.pdf
Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz P, Eastham JA, Ohori M, Rabbani F, Gerigk C, Reuter V, Graefen M, Hammerer PG, Erbersdobler A, Huland H, Kupelian P, Klein E, Quinn DI, Henshall SM, Grygiel JJ, Sutherland RL, Stricker PD, Morash CG, Scardino PT, Kattan MW (2003) A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 170:1798–1803. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000091805.98960.13
Briganti A, Blute ML, Eastham JH, Graefen M, Heidenreich A, Karnes JR, Montorsi F, Studer UE (2009) Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Euro Urol 55:1251–1265. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03.012
Eden CG, Arora A, Rouse P (2010) Extended vs standard pelvic lymphadenectomy during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. BJU Intl 106:537–542. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09161.x
Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167:1681–1686
Joniau S, Van den Bergh L, Lerut E, Deroose CM, Haustermans K, Oyen R, Budiharto T, Ameye F, Bogaerts K, Van Poppel H (2012) Mapping of pelvic lymph node metastases in prostate cancer. Euro Urol. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.057
Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Smith ER Jr, Wells N, Smith JA Jr (2003) Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169:145–147. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000039647.16278.17 discussion 147–148
Musch M, Klevecka V, Roggenbuck U, Kroepfl D (2008) Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy in 1,380 patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy between 1993 and 2006. J Urol 179:923–928. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.072 discussion 928–929
Conflict of interest
Dr. Kane is a consultant or has received honoraria from Amgen Inc., Janssen Inc, Dendreon Inc. and Intuitive Inc.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liss, M.A., Palazzi, K., Stroup, S.P. et al. Outcomes and complications of pelvic lymph node dissection during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 31, 481–488 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-013-1056-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-013-1056-9