Standard versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer in patients with a predicted probability of nodal metastasis greater than 1%

被引:105
作者
Touijer, Karim
Rabbani, Farhang
Otero, Javier Romero
Secin, Fernando P.
Eastham, James A.
Scardino, Peter T.
Guillonneau, Bertrand
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Sidney Kimmel Ctr Prostate & Urol Canc, New York, NY USA
关键词
lymph node excision; nomograms; laparoscopy; prostatic neoplasms;
D O I
10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.018
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: We determined the yield of standard vs limited pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with a predicted risk of lymph node metastasis greater than 1% according to the Partin tables predicted probability of pathological stage. We also determined the feasibility of laparoscopic standard pelvic lymph node dissection. Materials and Methods: Of 1,269 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy, 648 had a Partin's table predicted probability of lymph node invasion greater than 1%. Of the 648 patients 177 underwent limited pelvic lymph node dissection performed laparoscopically (group 1), and 471 underwent standard pelvic lymph node dissection performed open (367) or laparoscopically (104) (group 2). Templates of limited pelvic lymph node dissection included the external iliac lymph nodes whereas standard pelvic lymph node dissection included the external iliac, obturator and hypogastric lymph nodes. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the node positivity rate between groups 1 and 2. Results: On multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for prostate specific antigen, biopsy Gleason sum, clinical stage and surgical approach, the odds of node positivity were 7.15-fold higher (95% CI 2.49-20.5, p <0.001) for standard vs limited pelvic lymph node dissection. The median (mean) number of nodes retrieved was 9 (10) and 14 (15) after limited and standard pelvic lymph node dissection, respectively (p <0.001). A similar impact was observed in patients treated laparoscopically with standard vs limited pelvic lymph node dissection (odds ratio 15.6, 95% CI 3.7-66.4, p <0.001). Conclusions: Standard lymph node dissection yields positive nodes more frequently and retrieves a higher total nodal count than the often performed pelvic lymph node dissection limited to the external iliac nodes. Standard pelvic lymph node dissection is feasible through a transperitoneal laparoscopic approach.
引用
收藏
页码:120 / 124
页数:5
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: Impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
Allaf, ME ;
Palapattu, GS ;
Trock, BJ ;
Carter, HB ;
Walsh, PC .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 172 (05) :1840-1844
[2]   Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? [J].
Bader, P ;
Burkhard, FC ;
Markwalder, R ;
Studer, UE .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (03) :849-854
[3]   PELVIC LYMPHADENECTOMY CAN BE OMITTED IN SELECTED PATIENTS WITH CARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE - DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM OF PATIENT SELECTION [J].
BISHOFF, JT ;
REYES, A ;
THOMPSON, IM ;
HARRIS, MJ ;
STCLAIR, SR ;
GOMELLA, L ;
BUTZIN, CA .
UROLOGY, 1995, 45 (02) :270-274
[4]   ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR BILATERAL PELVIC LYMPHADENECTOMY IN SELECT PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE-CANCER [J].
BLUESTEIN, DL ;
BOSTWICK, DG ;
BERGSTRALH, EJ ;
OESTERLING, JE .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1994, 151 (05) :1315-1320
[5]   A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer [J].
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 .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (05) :1798-1803
[6]  
CATHELINEAU X, 2004, J UROLOGY, V82, P825
[7]   Prognosis of patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: Long-term results [J].
Daneshmand, S ;
Quek, ML ;
Stein, JP ;
Lieskovsky, G ;
Cai, J ;
Pinski, J ;
Skinner, EC ;
Skinner, DG .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 172 (06) :2252-2255
[8]   Implications of prostate micrometastases in pelvic lymph nodes: An archival tissue study [J].
Edelstein, RA ;
Zietman, AL ;
delasMorenas, A ;
Krane, RJ ;
Babayan, RK ;
Dallow, KC ;
Traish, A ;
Moreland, RB .
UROLOGY, 1996, 47 (03) :370-375
[9]   Prospective analysis of prostate-specific markers in pelvic lymph nodes of patients with high-risk prostate cancer [J].
Ferrari, AC ;
Stone, NN ;
Eyler, JN ;
Gao, M ;
Mandeli, J ;
Unger, P ;
Gallagher, RE ;
Stock, R .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1997, 89 (20) :1498-1504
[10]   Limited efficacy of preoperative computed tomographic scanning for the evaluation of lymph node metastasis in patients before radical prostatectomy [J].
Flanigan, RC ;
McKay, TC ;
Olson, M ;
Shankey, TV ;
Pyle, J ;
Waters, WB .
UROLOGY, 1996, 48 (03) :428-432