Predictors of Positive Retroperitoneal Lymph Nodes in Patients With High Risk Testicular Cancer

Lymph Node Dissection in Testicular Cancer: The State of the Art and Future Perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolving role of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in the management of testicular cancer (TC). It explores the significance of RPLND as both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool, highlighting its contribution to accurate staging, its impact on oncological outcomes, and its influence on subsequent treatment decisions.

RECENT FINDINGS

RPLND serves as an essential diagnostic procedure, aiding in the precise assessment of lymph node involvement and guiding personalized treatment strategies. It has demonstrated therapeutic value, particularly in patients with specific risk factors and disease stages, contributing to improved oncological outcomes and survival rates. Recent studies have emphasized the importance of meticulous patient selection and nerve-sparing techniques to mitigate complications while optimizing outcomes. Additionally, modern imaging and surgical approaches have expanded the potential applications of RPLND. In the context of TC management, RPLND remains a valuable and evolving tool. Its dual role in staging and therapy underscores its relevance in contemporary urological practice. This review highlights the critical role of RPLND in enhancing patient care and shaping treatment strategies, emphasizing the need for further research to refine patient selection and surgical techniques.

The Significance of Lymphovascular Invasion of the Spermatic Cord in the Absence of Cord Soft Tissue Invasion

Context.—

Testicular germ cell tumors with lymphovascular invasion (LVI) are staged pT2, and those with spermatic cord involvement are staged pT3.

Objective.—

To study the clinical significance of LVI within the spermatic cord without direct involvement of the cord soft tissues.

Design.—

A retrospective, multi-institutional review was performed on testicular GCTs with spermatic cord LVI in the absence of cord soft tissue invasion.

Results.—

Forty-four germ cell tumors had LVI in the spermatic cord without soft tissue invasion; 37 of 44 patients (84%) had nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT), and 7 (16%) had pure seminomas. Patients with NSGCTs and spermatic cord LVI had worse clinical outcomes compared with patients with pure seminoma and spermatic cord LVI (P = .008). We then compared patients with NSGCTs and spermatic cord LVI (n = 37) to patients with NSGCTs and LVI limited to the testis (n = 32). A significantly greater percentage of patients with LVI in the spermatic cord presented with advanced clinical stage (76% versus 50%; P = .01). There was no statistically significant difference in disease recurrence/progression or death between patients with spermatic cord LVI and patients with LVI limited to the testis (P = .40; P = .50). There was no significant difference in the presence of embryonal dominant histology (P = .30) or rete testis invasion (P = .50) between the 2 groups. More hilar soft tissue invasion was seen in patients with LVI present in the spermatic cord (P = .004).

Conclusions.—

In patients with NSGCTs, LVI in the spermatic cord, without soft tissue invasion, is associated with worse clinical stage at presentation compared with patients with LVI confined to the testis.

Lymphovascular invasion in testicular germ cell tumors: clinicopathological correlates

Introduction

We assessed clinical–pathological correlates of lymphovascular invasion in testicular germ–cell tumors.

Material and methods

Archived pathology specimens from 145 patients treated by radical orchiectomy for testicular germ cell tumors at our institution in 1995–2006 were reanalyzed by a dedicated urologic pathologist, and the corresponding medical records were reviewed. The association of lymphovascular invasion with clinical and pathological parameters was tested using stepwise logistic regression analysis.

Results

Lymphovascular invasion was identified in 38 (26%) patients and was associated with younger age, testicular pain at presentation, elevated serum tumor markers, nonseminoma histology, and advanced clinical stage. Orchalgia was indicated as the impetus for referral in 67 (46%) patients and characterized as a dull aching sensation, persistent or intermittent in nature. Among the 98 men diagnosed with clinical stage I, those presenting with testicular pain had a 1.8X–higher likelihood of lymphovascular invasion than those without pain (95% CI 1.13–14.9, p = 0.02), and patients with elevated serum tumor markers had an 8.5–fold increased probability of lymphovascular invasion than those presenting with normal tumor markers (CI 1.1–54.2, p = 0.05). Among men with nonseminoma histology, elevated tumor markers was the strongest predictor of lymphovascular invasion in both univariate and multivariate analyses (OR 5.05, 95% CI 1.16–21.8, p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Providing pathologists with information on pre–orchiectomy tumor marker levels and, possibly, testicular pain at presentation may increase their vigilance in searching for lymphovascular invasion, potentially improving their diagnostic accuracy. Whether it may also translate into improved oncological outcomes needs further evaluation.