Primary Robot-assisted Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Men with Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumor: Experience from a Multi-institutional Cohort

Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection: Perioperative Management and Updates on Surgical Techniques

Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) has been an integral part of a multimodal treatment strategy in testicular cancer. Surgeons, over the last decade, have advanced the understanding of RPLND by adopting perioperative care pathways, innovative biomarkers, surgical techniques, and developing algorithms for managing complications. This review summarizes updates on various aspects including the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway, imaging techniques, surgical approaches, dissection templates, and the management of complications. We conclude that RPLND has undergone significant evolution and refinement in the modern era and will continue to hold a critical role in the care of patients with testicular cancer.

Propensity-matched Analysis of Open Versus Robotic Primary Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Clinical Stage II Testicular Cancer

BACKGROUND

Open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (O-RPLND) is the accepted standard surgical approach to treat retroperitoneal nodal disease in testis cancer. Increasingly, robotic RPLND (R-RPLND) is being performed due to the potential for lower blood loss, shorter length of stay, and accelerated recovery.

OBJECTIVE

We have performed a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis comparing the survival and perioperative outcomes of O- and R-RPLND.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Analyzing the data from all patients who underwent primary RPLND at our center between 1990 and 2022, we used PSM to create a 2:1 (O-RPLND:R-RPLND) matched cohort.

INTERVENTION

Primary O-RPLND versus R-RPLND.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was time to relapse. The secondary endpoints included operating time, length of stay, estimated blood loss (EBL), and surgical complications. Relapse-free survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank tests were used to compare perioperative outcomes of O-RPLND versus R-RPLND.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 178 patients underwent primary RPLND: 137 O-RPLND and 41 R-RPLND. After PSM, 26 patients in the R-RPLND group were matched with 38 in the O-RPLND group. After matching, no significant baseline differences were noted. After a median follow-up of 23.5 mo (interquartile range 4.4-59.2), one (3.8%) relapse was noted in the R-RPLND group versus three (7.8%) in the O-RPLND group; however, this was not significant (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.07-6.31, p = 0.7097). No in-field relapses occurred in either cohort. R-RPLND was associated with a shorter length of stay (1 vs 5 d, p < 0.0001) and lower EBL (200 vs 300 ml, p = 0.032), but longer operative time (8.8 vs 4.3 h, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

R-RPLND offers low morbidity and improved perioperative outcomes, while maintaining oncologic efficacy of the open approach.

PATIENT SUMMARY

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to compare open and robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) using a propensity score-matched system. We encourage the discussion and inclusion of primary R-RPLND into the standard of care algorithm for patients with de novo clinical stage (CS) II and relapsed CS I with CS II equivalent disease.

Robotic-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Robotic-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) is an emerging surgical option for testicular cancer with less morbidity than open RPLND. We outline the operative technique used at our center and review contemporary evidence in the advancement of R-RPLND.

RECENT FINDINGS

R-RPLND is being applied effectively beyond clinical stage I testicular cancer to treat low-volume, clinical stage II disease in both the primary and postchemotherapy setting. Compared with the open approach, R-RPLND offers shorter hospitalization and less blood loss with comparably low complications and oncologic control.

SUMMARY

With ongoing adoption and optimization of R-RPLND, future studies will assess long-term oncologic outcomes and disseminate R-RPLND in the treatment of testicular cancer.

Postchemotherapy robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for non-seminomatous germ cell tumors in the lateral decubitus position: oncological and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is recommended for residual masses following chemotherapy for non-seminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT). Recently, aberrant recurrence patterns were reported in patients who underwent robotic RPLND. We aimed to evaluate perioperative safety in addition to functional and early oncological outcomes of postchemotherapy robotic RPLND (pcR-RPLND) for NSGCT.

METHODS

A total of 25 patients with NSGCT who underwent a pcR-RPLND between January 2011 and June 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Descriptive statistics were provided for demographics, clinical characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative parameters. Functional and oncological outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 28.9 years (IQR 21.5-32.4). The median retroperitoneal tumor size was 2.6 cm (IQR 1.5-3.5). Intraoperative complications occurred in only one case and the open conversion rate was 12%. There were seven cases with postoperative complications (Clavien grade II: 5 and IIIa: 2). Patients were followed for a median of 33.2 months (IQR 14.8-43.0). Antegrade ejaculation was preserved in 85.7% of the patients. Two patients (8%) relapsed and both had out-of-field recurrences at unusual sites (perinephric fat and omentum). Of those, one patient died (4%) of testicular cancer.

CONCLUSION

pcR-RPLND is a feasible and technically reproducible procedure with favorable perioperative morbidity, low rate of complications, and acceptable postoperative ejaculatory function. Although the recurrence rate was low (8%), recurrences were observed at unusual sites. Further studies are required to investigate any association between the robotic approach and aberrant recurrence patterns.

Robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: a systematic review of perioperative outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) and to compare the perioperative outcomes of R-RPLND with open RPLND (O-RPLND), as RPLND forms an integral part of the management of testis cancer and R-RPLND is a minimally invasive treatment option for this disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed^® , Scopus^® , Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science™ databases were searched for studies reporting perioperative outcomes of primary and post-chemotherapy R-RPLND and studies comparing R-RPLND with O-RPLND.

RESULTS

The search yielded 42 articles describing R-RPLND, including five comparative studies. The systematic review included 4222 patients (single-arm studies, n = 459; comparative studies, n = 3763). Of 459 patients in the single-arm studies, 271 underwent primary R-RPLND and 188 underwent post-chemotherapy R-RPLND. For primary R-RPLND, the operative time ranged from 175 to 540 min and the major complication rate was 4.1%. For post-chemotherapy R-RPLND, the operative time ranged from 134 to 550 min and the major complication rate was 8.5%. The conversion rate to open surgery was 2.2% in primary R-RPLND and 9.0% in post-chemotherapy R-RPLND. In comparison with O-RPLND, R-RPLND was associated with a lower transfusion rate (14.5% vs 0.9%, P < 0.001) and a lower complication rate (18.5% vs 7.8%, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted RPLND has acceptable perioperative outcomes in both the primary and post-chemotherapy settings but a notable rate of conversion to open surgery in the post-chemotherapy setting. Compared with O-RPLND, R-RPLND is associated with a lower transfusion rate and fewer overall complications. Given the potential impact of selection bias, the optimal patient selection criteria for R-RPLND remain to be elucidated.

Intravascular Ultrasound for the Evaluation and Management of Retroperitoneal, Genitourinary Malignancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Herein we provide a review of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and its ability to assist in the evaluation and surgical management of advanced retroperitoneal, genitourinary tumors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advanced retroperitoneal tumors such as advanced renal cell carcinoma, bulky retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy associated with advanced testicular carcinoma, large adrenal tumors, and retroperitoneal sarcomas can invade, compress, or distort vascular anatomy making surgical resection challenging and high risk. Intravascular ultrasonography is commonly used by vascular and cardiothoracic surgery to provide a real time assessment of vascular invasion, compression, and aberrant anatomy to assist with pre-operative and/or intraoperative decision-making. However, the application of this technology to assist with cancer surgery has been limited. The use of intravascular ultrasound prior to radical, extirpative, retroperitoneal surgery involving large vessels can aid in the planning and execution of such challenging operations.

Indications, feasibility and outcome of robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for metastatic testicular germ cell tumours

Data on robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) for metastatic testicular germ cell tumours (mTGCTs) are scarce and the use of R-RPLND itself is still under debate. The aim of our study was to evaluate the indications, feasibility and outcomes of R-RPLND, with special emphasis on differences between primary R-RPLND (pR-RPLND) and post-chemotherapeutic R-RPLND (pcR-RPLND) in mTGCTs. We retrospectively analysed the data of patients who underwent R-RPLND for mTGCT between November 2013 and September 2019 in two centres in Germany. Indications, operative technique, intra- and postoperative complications and oncologic outcome were analysed. Twenty-three mTGCT patients underwent R-RPLND (7 pR-RPLND, 16 pcR-RPLND). For pR-RPLND versus pcR-RPLND, median time of surgery was 243 min [interquartile range (IQR) 123-303] versus 359 min (IQR 202-440, p = 0.154) and median blood loss 100 mL (IQR 50-200) versus 275 mL (IQR 100-775, p = 0.018). Intra- and postoperative complications were more frequent in pcR-RPLND (pcR-RPLND: intra/post: 44%/44%; pR-RPLND: intra/post: 0%/29%). However, these were only statistically significant in the case of intraoperative complications (intra: p = 0.036, post: p = 0.579). Intraoperative complications (n = 7), conversions (n = 4) and transfusions (n = 4) occurred in pcR-RPLND patients only. After a median follow-up of 16.3 months (IQR 7.5-35.0) there were no recurrences or deaths. R-RPLND displays a valuable, minimally invasive treatment option in mTGCT. However, R-RPLND is challenging and pcR-RPLND especially bears a considerable risk of complications. This operation should be limited to patients with an easily accessible residual tumour mass and to surgeons experienced in robotic surgery and TGCT treatment.