The Role of Robotic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testis 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.

Lymph node density as a prognostic marker of relapse in patients who underwent primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection

INTRODUCTION

Primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (pRPLND) is a treatment option for clinical stage (CS) II testicular germ cell tumors (TGCTs) and CS I with retroperitoneal relapse. Increasing raw lymph node yield during pRPLND has been associated a decreased relapse risk. However, this metric has limitations due to variations in surgical templates and specimen processing methods. We aimed to evaluate the lymph node density (LND), which is the ratio of positive lymph nodes to the total number of nodes removed, as a prognostic marker for relapse after pRPLND.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients who underwent pRPLND at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 1990 and 2022. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS). RFS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. The log-rank test was used to assess the impact of LND, and recursive binary partitioning was used to determine the threshold LND that provides optimum separation in RFS.

RESULTS

In this study, 178 patients were treated with pRPLND. A total of 137 (77%) patients had pathological evidence of nodal metastasis, 96 were treated with open RPLND, and 41 with robotic RPLND. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 32 (IQR 23-43) and median total positive nodes was 2 (IQR 1-36). This translated into a median LND of 3.1% (IQR 1.7-57.1). There was no significant difference in the LND between robotic and open approaches (P = 0.6664). After a median follow-up of 38.6 months, 11 patients (8.02%) had relapsed. LND was not significantly associated with relapse (HR 1.018, 95% CI, 0.977-1.061). The optimal threshold to dichotomize LND that provides optimum separation in RFS was ≥ 26.75%, however, it did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.0651).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the LND was not associated with RFS after pRPLND in patients with TGCTs. The unique characteristics of TGCTs and the presence of other established risk factors limit the utility of the LND alone in predicting relapse.

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.

Robotic RPLND for stage IIA/B nonseminoma: the Princess Margaret Experience

PURPOSE

Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is a treatment option for men in a primary and post-chemotherapy setting. The aim of this review was to explore the published data looking at feasibility, safety and outcomes of robotic RPLND for CSI/II NSGCT but we will in particular highlight how we have approached adoption of robotic RPLND at the Princess Margaret.

METHODS

A review and summary of the published data to date was performed regarding the role of robotic RPLND for stage IIA/B nonseminoma.

RESULTS

Published series of robotic RPLND to date have proven feasibility and safety in experienced centres. Less blood loss, shorter length of stay and decreased morbidity are promising findings. Our data from Princess Margaret strengthen the argument of oncologic efficacy as we operated only on patients with known retroperitoneal disease (Stage at RPLND was IIA (n = 15, 55.6%), IIB (n = 9, 33.3%), IIC (n = 1, 3.7%) and III (n = 2, 7.4%)), did not use adjuvant chemotherapy and found a relapse rate (11%) similar to open RPLND.

CONCLUSIONS

The debate is ongoing regarding the role of robotic RPLND- the excellent oncological outcomes achieved by an open RPLND are the minimum starting point for robotic RPLND. Until such time that robotic RPLND is proven to be gold standard it should be performed in experienced centres by high volume RPLND surgeons and in the setting of a protocol.

Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection Versus Surveillance for Adult Early Stage Pure Testicular Teratoma: A Nationwide Analysis

PURPOSE

Following radical orchiectomy, surveillance and primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) are acceptable options for the management of early stage pure testicular teratoma in adult patients; however, there is no uniform consensus. The aim of this study was to investigate survival outcomes of adults with early stage pure testicular teratoma based on management strategy.

METHODS

Data was extracted from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from testicular cancer patients diagnosed with clinical stage (CS) I pure teratoma (pT1-4N0M0S0) between 2004 and 2014. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to assess clinical outcomes based on management strategy.

RESULTS

Of the 61,167 patients diagnosed with testicular cancer, 692 (1.1%) had pure teratoma. Only individuals with CS I disease were considered (n = 237). The median age was 28 (23-35) years. Overall, 43 (18%) patients underwent RPLND and 194 (82%) patients were managed with surveillance. There was an increase in surveillance for CS I teratoma during the study period. Increasing distance from residence to treatment facility was an unadjusted predictor for undergoing primary RPLND (p < 0.001). Median follow-up was 54 months and there was no significant difference in overall survival between CS I teratoma patients managed with RPLND and those managed with surveillance (p = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a trend toward increasing adoption of surveillance for the management of early stage pure testicular teratoma in adults. Our findings suggest that surveillance provides comparable survival outcomes to primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in this setting.

Robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for primary and post-chemotherapy testis cancer

The role of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in testicular cancer is well established in both the primary and post-chemotherapy setting. The aim of this study was to report our 2 years oncological outcomes of robotic RPLND. A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing robotic RPLND by a single surgeon at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Demographic, perioperative, and oncologic data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Between September 2014 and June 2020, 141 patients underwent an RPLND [33 (23.4%) were primary, 108 (76.6%) were post-chemotherapy]. 27 (19.1%) patients underwent a robotic bilateral template nerve-sparing RPLND. RPLND indication was primary (i.e. pre-chemotherapy) in 18 (66.7%), and post-chemotherapy in 9 (33.3%) patients. Stage at RPLND was 2A (n = 15, 55.6%), 2B (n = 9, 33.3%), 2C (n = 1, 3.7%) and 3 (n = 2, 7.4%). Median OR time (incision to closure) was 525 min and blood loss was 200 ml. Nerve sparing was performed in all but one case. Six (22.2%) adjuvant procedures were performed including two (7.4%) vascular repairs. Median length of stay was 2 days. Viable tumor was detected in 17 (63%) and teratoma in 9 (33.3%). Median follow-up was 31.3 months. No adjuvant chemotherapy was given. Three patients (11.1%) relapsed: 2 out-of-field and 1 with both in-field and out-of-field disease. Robotic RPLND can be performed safely. Long-term follow-up of series such as ours, enriched with patients with viable disease and/or teratoma, and not treated with adjuvant chemotherapy is required to ensure oncological outcomes are comparable to the open approach.

Single port robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review

Several studies have assessed the safety and feasibility of single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using different and custom built robotic-assisted technology. In part due to the non-standardized nature of these approaches, single site robotic prostatectomy has not been widely adopted. With the recent approval of the da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA) Single Port (SP) platform, there has been a renewed interest in single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and several institutions have begun reporting their initial experiences with this technique. In this systematic review, we sought to assess and summarize the literature regarding patient outcomes for single site robotic-assisted prostatectomy and evaluate its role in surgical treatment of prostate cancer. This systematic review was structured using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies describing the use of any robotic platform, including da Vinci Si, Xi or SP platforms for robotic single-port or single site radical prostatectomy between 2000 and July 15, 2019 were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Studies were excluded if they included combined cases with other organ resection, represented use in a non-clinical setting (such as a cadaveric model), or described results for a simple prostatectomy technique. Data was extracted by two authors with concerns resolved by consensus. Primary outcomes were mean operative times, estimated blood loss (mL), and hospital length of stay (days). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative conversion to open surgery, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Variables of interest included sample size (n), mean age (years), mean prostate size (mL), prostate specific antigen (PSA, ng/mL), Gleason score, clinical and pathological TNM staging [American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC)], lymph nodes (n) and perioperative complications as available. A total of 217 studies were reviewed by title and abstract, with 28 selected for full-text review; ultimately, 12 studies were included, with available data from 145 patients. Primary outcomes and preoperative characteristics varied greatly amongst patients and across studies. One patient (0.7%) required conversion to a multi-port approach and there were no conversions to an open technique. No intraoperative complications were reported, and no Clavien grade III or greater postoperative complications have been described in the initial 81 radical prostatectomies performed with the SP platform. Single Port techniques appear to represent a safe and feasible approach for performing the minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. The current available literature on the single port radical prostatectomy is weak and consists of single center studies with small sample sizes, short-term follow up and limited functional data. More rigorous multi-center trials with standardized metrics for reporting functional outcomes as well as long-term cancer specific survival are necessary to validate these initial studies.