Selection of patients for laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy prior to radical prostatectomy: a decision analysis

Optimal cost-effective staging evaluations in prostate cancer

A new diagnosis of prostate cancer presents to both the patient and physician questions regarding the best approach for further assessing the extent of disease prior to selecting a treatment strategy. In addition to the initial clinical data such as serum prostate-specific antigen level, findings on digital rectal examination, and core biopsy Gleason score, several procedures and imaging modalities are available to further stage newly diagnosed prostate cancer. A substantial percentage of the cost of managing prostate cancer is directly related to staging evaluations. Often, staging evaluations are performed that have limited test performance characteristics, subject the patient to unnecessary morbidity, or simply do not provide additional useful clinical information. It is important that the physician be familiar with the indications for the available staging modalities as well as the test performance characteristics in order to proceed appropriately and in an economically judicious fashion. This paper reviews the literature on this topic and summarizes previous experiences with procedures and imaging modalities for staging newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

Radical perineal prostatectomy: a novel approach for lymphadenectomy from perineal incision

PURPOSE

A major disadvantage of radical perineal prostatectomy is that lymphadenectomy cannot be performed through the same incision. We developed a novel approach to access the obturator and internal iliac lymph nodes, partially the external iliac lymph nodes, via the perineal incision. We describe the method of lymphadenectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After moving the rectum off of the prostate we separate the levator ani muscle and endopelvic fascia from the lateral prostate with finger dissection. A trocar mounted balloon distention device is inserted toward this space and distended with 200 cc air to create an intrapelvic space. Using several retractors or laparoscopy for viewing we first identify the obturator nerve and then the external iliac vessels next in order of depth. By retracting the obturator nerve with vessel tape we perform lymph node dissection between the obturator nerve and external iliac vessels under direct vision or laparoscopic guidance.

RESULTS

We have performed this technique in 20 consecutive patients because of prostate specific antigen greater than 10 ng/ml, Gleason score greater than 7 or bilateral disease. Bilateral lymph node dissection required 15 to 20 minutes. No major bleeding or complications occurred. The number of nodes was similar to that in our retropubic prostatectomy series because of the limited lymphadenectomy that we usually performed. Fecal incontinence and potency results were almost the same as in patients without lymphadenectomy. Although urinary continence was not good at catheter removal on day 7, patients became dry in 1 to 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This method resolves the major disadvantage of perineal prostatectomy. Radical perineal prostatectomy with lymphadenectomy via the same incision is feasible and reproducible.

[Prostate cancer: has local radiation treatment had an impact on survival?]

Local control is an important goal in the treatment of prostate cancer. Firstly, it avoids the morbidity due to locoregional evolution (urethral obstruction, vascular compression, rectal or vesical involvement). Moreover, local control of the disease may decrease the mortality due to metastases disseminated from local relapse. Local control evaluation remains difficult: neither rectal examination nor imaging or prostate biopsies have an absolute value in diagnostic of local relapse. PSA increase does not permit to differentiate local from distant relapses. Recent developments in radiotherapy techniques allow dose escalation without major toxicity. Retrospective studies and one randomized study have shown that an increase from 70 to 80 Gy or more, improve biological relapse-free survival. In one randomized study comparing 70 to 78 Gy, the biochemical disease-free survival was improved from 69 to 79% at five years. Such an improvement can only be explained by an improvement of local control. The benefit in term of overall survival is not yet demonstrated and needs a longer follow-up and other studies. Another approach to improve local control is the association of a local radiotherapy with hormonal adjuvant therapy. Four randomized studies have been published for locally advanced prostate cancer. These studies have all demonstrated an improvement of local control, and a decrease of metastatic risk. The benefit in term of overall survival, observed in one of this trial, may be explained by the improvement of either local or distant control or both. Such therapeutic progress, associated with the development of prostate cancer screening should lead to a decrease of prostate cancer mortality for the next ten years.

Indications, technique, and results of laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy

Despite considerable clinical research, there is still controversy about the optimal management of the pelvic lymph nodes in men with prostate cancer. This article reviews the creation and application of selection criteria for laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy and describes the various techniques.

Should laparoscopy be the standard approach used for pelvic lymph node dissection?

Involvement of the pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer worsens the overall prognosis of this common disease entity. Prior radiographic staging techniques, including fine-needle aspiration, are limited by a poor sensitivity and are not reliable. The gold standard for the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in men with prostate cancer involves performing a lymphadenectomy. Historically, this procedure was performed using an open surgical technique. Unfortunately, this invasive procedure is associated with significant morbidity. In response, modern surgical technology has provided newer, less invasive techniques, including laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LPLND). Improved detection of localized prostate cancer through the institution of screening protocols and early detection programs has decreased the number of patients presenting with lymph node involvement. Various clinical indicators, including prostate-specific antigen, grade, and stage, have been used to improve the selection of "high-risk" patients that are appropriate candidates for pelvic lymph node dissection. The technique of LPLND is a valid option in the armamentarium for staging of prostate cancer. The laparoscopic approach provides the same staging accuracy as the open surgical technique and is superior with respect to morbidity. LPLND is limited to patients who present with a high risk of advanced prostate cancer. In addition, the urologist must accept the additional training, financial expense, and "learning curve" associated with this technique.

Results of laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients at high risk for nodal metastases from prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LPLND) can be performed safely and with minimal morbidity in the staging of prostate cancer. Its utility in evaluating patients at high risk for metastatic disease before primarily nonsurgical treatment modalities was evaluated.

METHODS

Twenty-four consecutive patients who underwent LPLND between June 1993 and July 1996 were studied. These patients were considered poor surgical candidates based on several risk factors, as follows: elevation of serum PSA >20 in 19 patients (79%); elevation of serum acid phosphatase in 4 patients (17%); digital rectal examination findings indicative of extraprostatic extension or seminal vesical involvement in 14 patients (58%); and poorly differentiated tumors on prostate biopsy in 19 patients (79%). Nineteen patients (79%) had two or more of these risk factors. Median PSA for the entire series of patients was 35.2 ng/mL (range 7.9 to 133 ng/mL), and median Gleason score was 7 (range 5 to 9). Preoperative CT or MRI was negative for pelvic lymph node metastases in 17 of 23 patients (79%), and bone scan was negative in all 24 patients.

RESULTS

Unilateral (n = 2) or bilateral (n = 22) LPLND was performed in all patients. Six patients (25%) had lymph node metastases detected laparoscopically. Five of the six patients had palpable extraprostatic extension (T3a/b) or invasion of a seminal vesical (T3c), and in four of these patients the site of the metastatic lymph nodes was ipsilateral to the palpable prostate abnormality. None of the risk factors was independently predictive of lymph node metastases within this series of patients. An average of 10.8 +/- 6.5 lymph nodes was removed at a mean operative time of 174 +/- 10 minutes for patients undergoing bilateral LPLND. Estimated blood loss was minimal for 20 of 22 patients (92%) undergoing LPLND alone, and there were no complications requiring open exploration. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.2 +/- 0.5 days for patients undergoing LPLND alone.

CONCLUSIONS

LPLND can be used efficiently to identify patients with nodal metastases from select high-risk patients. This, in turn, can exclude such patients from noncurative local and regional therapy.

Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: comparison of the extended and modified techniques

PURPOSE

We compared the results of extended (obturator, hypogastric, common and external iliac nodes) to modified (obturator and hypogastric nodes only) laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 189 patients with stage T1 to T3 prostate cancer underwent modified (150) or extended (39) laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for pelvic nodal assessment before definitive treatment.

RESULTS

Twice as many lymph nodes were removed via extended than modified laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection (mean 17:8 versus 9.3). The overall positivity rate was 23 of 189 lymph nodes (12.2%), including 14 of 150 (7.3%) for modified and 9 of 39 (23.1%) for extended dissection (p = 0.02). Two patients (22%) who underwent extended dissection had positive lymph nodes in the external iliac area. Patients who presented with the high risk features of prostate specific antigen (PSA) greater than 20 ng./ml., Gleason score 7 or greater, or stage T2b disease or greater had a 26.5% (p = 0.0002), 22% (p = 0.0006) or 16.4% (p = 0.003) likelihood of positive lymph nodes, respectively. For extended versus modified laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection node positivity in high risk patients was 27% versus 18.8% (p = 0.4), 30 versus 26.4% (p = 0.8) and 25.4 versus 14.6% (p = 0.17) for Gleason score 7 or greater, PSA greater than 20 ng./ml. and disease stage T2b to T3a, respectively. Patients who underwent the extended procedure had a higher complication rate (35.9 versus 2%, p < 0.0001). No laparotomy was required.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite yielding a 2-fold higher node count and higher node positivity rate, extended laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection offers no advantage over modified laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for diagnosing positive lymph nodes when results are analyzed by prognostic factors. The extended procedure is associated with a much higher complication rate. In patients with the high risk features of PSA greater than 20 ng./ml., Gleason score 7 or greater and stage T2b to T3a disease modified laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection can be performed safely and effectively to help identify those who may benefit most from curative therapy.

Should cryosurgery be considered a therapeutic option in localized prostate cancer?

Cryosurgical ablation of the prostate currently is under investigation as a potential treatment for localized prostate cancer. Results to date indicate that the majority of patients have negative biopsies and a marked reduction in prostate-specific antigen levels following cryotherapy. This treatment, however, is associated with significant side effects, notably bladder outflow obstruction, impotence, and incontinence, and its long-term durability is still unknown.

Decision analysis in surgery

BACKGROUND

The technique of decision analysis is often applied to clinical policy and economic issues in surgery. Because surgeons may be unfamiliar with such work, this article catalogues decision analysis studies in the surgical specialties.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical literature (1966 to 1994) to identify surgical decision analysis studies and to assess trends over time. Each article was categorized according to the type of journal (surgical, other clinical, or technical) in which it was published and content, including surgical specialty, clinical topic, article focus (individual patient decision making, clinical policy, or cost-effectiveness), and primary findings.

RESULTS

Publication rates of surgical decision analysis have increased dramatically over time. Of the 86 total studies only six were published before 1980. In contrast, 44 studies appeared between 1990 and 1994. Although 77% were published in nonsurgical journals, decision analyses have begun to appear more regularly in surgical forums. Studies addressing all of the surgical specialties were found, although more than one half addressed topics in general surgery (34%) or cardiothoracic surgery (22%). The most frequent topics were gallstones (11 articles), head and neck cancer (five articles), coronary artery disease (four articles), and cerebral arteriovenous malformations (four articles). Articles focusing on clinical policy (i.e., those assessing surgical efficacy for broad groups of patients) now account for large majority of published decision analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of decision analysis in surgery is growing steadily. Because decision analysis is being used to influence clinical policy, it is important for surgeons to be aware of these studies and to be able to review them critically.

A new minimally invasive open pelvic lymphadenectomy surgical technique for the staging of prostate cancer

We report a new method for lymphadenectomy, the minilaparotomy (inguinal) pelvic lymph node dissection (MLPLND), and compare it with laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in terms of cost, effectiveness, operation time and morbidity. We reviewed a series of 111 consecutive patients: 51 had MLPLND and 60 had LPLND. All patients had proved adenocarcinoma of the prostate by biopsy. Of the MLPLND patients, only 1 had to stay overnight in the hospital, and all left within 24 hours. Pelvic lymphadenectomy consisted of nodal removal along the internal iliac vessels and the external iliac vein, and nodes of the obturator foramen. A total of 14% of the patients had disease involving the lymph nodes. The cost of MLPLND was 50% of the cost of LPLND, with no interoperative or postoperative morbidity. This new operation can be performed thoroughly an inexpensively in approximately 35 minutes, with little or no morbidity. Since the drawbacks of laparoscopic techniques associated with instrument costs and the learning curve for this technically difficult operation are eliminated, staging pelvic lymphadenectomy can be performed routinely on a wider variety of patients with potential metastatic disease. Currently, we recommend MLPLND to any patient with a tumor of Gleason score 7 or higher or a serum prostate-specific antigen value of 15 ng/mL or higher.

Linfadenectomia laparoscopica e Mini-lap: Attualità, limiti ed indicazioni

The authors, according to their preliminary experience with laparoscopic lymphadenectomy and Mini-lap performed for the staging of 15 patients with prostatic carcinoma, have compared the morbidity, the diagnostic accuracy rate and costs of these two techniques, referring critically to international literature and evaluating the real efficacy of a delayed laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy prior to radical prostatectomy. Moreover they have tested the general applicability of the equation by Roach et al., which was empirically derived from a nomogram reported by Partin et al., to predict the risk of lymph node metastasis, applying it to a selected group of patients who underwent radical prostatectomy from 1992 to 1994 in order to maximize the utility of lymphadenectomy for prostatic cancer staging.

One hundred consecutive laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissections: comparing complications of the first 50 cases to the second 50 cases

OBJECTIVES

To report the outcome of our first 100 consecutive laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissections (LPLND) and compare the early complication rate of the first 50 cases (14%) to the second 50 cases (4%).

METHODS

We reviewed 100 patients who underwent LPLND: Ninety-six patients had carcinoma of the prostate and underwent LPLND prior to radical prostatectomy or definitive radiation therapy. Four patients had histologically proved penile (2) or bladder carcinoma (2) and underwent LPLND to assess their pelvic lymph nodes.

RESULTS

We encountered 7 major and minor complications in our first 50 cases, and 2 minor complications in our second 50 cases. The overall complication rate was 9% (9 of 100).

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that modification of our operative technique and changes in patient management resulted in a lower complication rate in the second 50 patients. We conclude that although LPLND has a significant learning curve, it is a viable surgical staging option for patients with urologic pelvic malignancies.

The role of radical surgery in the treatment of prostatic cancer

At present, prostatic cancer is the most common malignancy in men in many Western countries and its incidence is continuously increasing. Radical prostatectomy has been used for over 80 years, but there is still controversy about its role in the treatment of localized prostatic cancer. Because of insufficient knowledge of the natural history of prostatic cancer and a lack of accurate prognostic factors there are possibilities for both over- and undertreatment. Better staging methods are also required to discriminate between intra- and extracapsular tumours, which is essential for curative treatment. On the basis of the facts mentioned above and because of the poor sensitivity and specificity of transrectal palpation, ultrasound examination and prostate-specific antigen, which are used in screening, diagnosing and staging of prostatic cancer, screening is not yet recommended for the detection of early prostatic cancer.