Long-term oncological outcomes of patients with negative sentinel lymph node in vulvar cancer. Comparative study with conventional lymphadenectomy

Surgery as primary treatment improved overall survival in vulvar squamous cancer: A single center study with 108 women

OBJECTIVE

To describe a single-center experience managing women with vulvar squamous cancer and analyze factors influencing their survival.

STUDY DESIGN

It is an observational longitudinal retrospective study that reviewed medical records of patients admitted for treatment at the University of Campinas between 2010 and 2019, followed up until June 2022. The final sample was 108 cases. The main outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Other variables were age, stage, relapse, and race. Vital status was accessed by medical records, active search, or public online register. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank Test, and Regression Cox-Model assessed risks.

RESULTS

The mean age in stages IA and IB were 65.0 years, and in stages II + III + IVA 71.1 years. Women 70 years or older were more related to diagnosis in stages II + III + IVA (p = 0.019). Progression was observed in 7 (16.7 %) patients in stage IB and 30 (65.2 %) in stage II + III + IVA. Both five-year (5y) DFS and OS were significantly different in stage IB and II + III + IVA (5y-DFS 70.5 % and 39.3 %, p = 0.024; 65.1 % and 24.3 %, p < 0.001). In stages II + III + IVA, most deaths happened before 24 months of follow-up. The primary treatment was surgery in 81.0 % of stage IB and 47.8 % of stage II + III + IVA. A higher OS was observed in patients treated primarily by surgery compared to radiotherapy in stage IB (p = 0.008), and in stages II + III + IVA (p = 0.013). Surgery followed or not by adjuvant radiotherapy was independently associated with a 60 % adjusted death protection compared to radiotherapy alone as primary treatment (0.40, 0.23;0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the patients have been diagnosed in stage I. The progression rate was high in the advanced stages of the disease. Overall survival by stage was improved when surgery was the primary treatment. Surgery was independently associated with death.

Surgical Management of Vulvar Melanoma: A Case Series

Vulvar malignant melanoma is the second most common subtype of vulvar cancer, accounting for 5-10% of all vulvar cancers. The prognosis is still very poor, although some advances have been achieved in the last years. One of the most significant changes in its management has been the development of less invasive surgical techniques that diminish the risk of postoperative morbidity and long-lasting sequelae. In this article, we review the surgical management of the pathology, based on the comment of 3 cases with vulvar melanoma treated at our institution.

Safety and feasibility of single-incision radical vulvectomy: a novel approach for the treatment of vulvar cancer

Background

In the process of decreasing the morbidity of wound-related complications after vulvectomy and IL for treating vulvar malignancy, we performed a novel surgical procedure—single-incision radical vulvectomy (SIRV). Here, we share our initial experience and report its safety and feasibility.

Methods

Patients with advanced local vulvar tumors were sequentially enrolled in this prospective cohort study to undergo SIRV. While performing SIRV, routine radical vulvectomies were performed first. Subsequently, the flaps of the bridge area between the vulvectomy incisions and femoral triangles were separated and the lymph nodes underneath were removed. Anterior working spaces (AWS) before the femoral triangle were then made. The saphenous vein was carefully identified and retained, while the superficial and deep inguinal lymph nodes were removed from the medial to the lateral sides. After careful hemostasis, the wounds were sutured. Patient demographics, clinical data, pathologic data, operation time, node count, and complications were recorded.

Results

Ten patients underwent SIRV for vulvar cancer. Average hospital stay was 11.70±3.16 (range, 9–13) days. The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 7.59±3.62 (range, 3–15) and 15.14±3.63 (range, 11–20) for per side or both sides of the groin. Blood loss was ≤35 mL. Three patients developed inguinal lymphoceles and underwent needle aspirations. Two patients had impaired wound healing and achieved healing after dressing change. No other postoperative complications were noted during follow-up.

Conclusions

Compared with conventional open inguinal lymphadenectomy (COIL) and video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL), SIRV is a more minimally invasive procedure. Our short-term observations showed that SIRV is safe and feasible and has good future application prospects for vulvar cancer. However, definitive conclusions cannot be made. Therefore, long-term oncologic outcomes and large-scale clinical trials are warranted.

Utilization and outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early stage vulvar cancer

OBJECTIVE

A retrospective cohort study comparing survival and perioperative outcomes of patients with early vulvar cancer who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy versus standard lymphadenectomy METHODS: Patients diagnosed between January 2012 and December 2015 with vulvar squamous cell carcinoma of less than 4 cm in size, with invasion of at least 1 mm, who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy, lymphadenectomy, or both were identified from the National Cancer Database. Overall survival was evaluated following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test for patients who had at least 1 month of follow-up. A Cox model was constructed to control for confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1583 patients were identified; 304 patients (19.2%) underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy alone. Sentinel lymph node biopsy utilization increased 13.9% between 2012 and 2015. Patients who underwent sentinel node biopsy alone were less likely to have comorbidities compared with those undergoing lymphadenectomy only or sentinel node biopsy with lymphadenectomy (25.3% vs 32.9% vs 31.9%, p=0.042), had smaller tumors (median 1.6 vs 2.0 vs 2.0 cm, p<0.001), and were less likely to have positive lymph nodes (11% vs 19.6% vs 28.1%, p<0.001). There was no difference in 3 year overall survival between the three groups (86.3% vs 82.1% vs 77.9%, p=0.26). After controlling for age, race, insurance, comorbidities, lymph node metastases, and tumor size, sentinel lymph node biopsy alone was not associated with worse overall survival compared with lymphadenectomy (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.32). The sentinel node only group had shorter inpatient stays compared with lymphadenectomy only (median 1 vs 2 days, p<0.001) and a lower rate of unplanned readmission (1.7% vs 5.0%, p=0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of sentinel lymph node biopsy is increasing in the management of vulvar cancer and is associated with superior perioperative outcomes without impacting overall survival.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy procedure in squamous vulvar cancer. 10 years follow-up analysis

AIM

Application of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) procedure in early-stage vulvar cancer and analysis of results, recurrences and complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

40 patients with vulvar cancer and SLNB between 2008 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. During the surgical procedure the inguinofemoral lymph nodes were checked with a gamma probe to identify the sentinel nodes that were removed and referred for intraoperative pathological assessment. Subsequently, long-term patient follow-up was performed with analysis of complications, relapse and mortality.

RESULTS

40 patients (mean age: 72 years [47-86], the overall detection rate per patient was 95% and a total of 129 Sentinel Lymph Nodes (SLNs) were removed (3.22 SLN/patient). In 3 out of 25 patients with lateral tumour lesions drainage was bilateral and in 2 out of 15 with midline lesions drainage was unilateral. On lymphoscintigraphy, 16 out of 40 had bilateral drainage and 24 unilateral. A total of 119 SLN- and 10 SLN+ were obtained, in 8 out of 10 an inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy was performed. In the SLN- group, one case of lymphatic blockage and one false negative were included. In 12 out of 40 patients there were post-surgical complications, 4 of them lymphoedemas. In the median follow-up (40 months), 6 out of 10 with SLN+ (40% mortality) and 7 out of 30 SLN- (16% mortality) had recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

SLNB in vulvar cancer is the technique of choice for correct staging and locoregional therapy. Correct clinical lymph node staging is important before surgery in order to avoid potential blockage drainages which could induce a false negative SLN.

Lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel lymph node biopsy in vulvar carcinoma: update from a European expert panel

PURPOSE

This study aimed to update the clinical practice applications and technical procedures of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in vulvar cancer from European experts.

METHODS

A systematic data search using PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed up to May 29, 2019. Only original studies focused on SLN biopsy in vulvar cancer, published in the English language and with a minimum of nine patients were selected.

RESULTS

Among 280 citations, 65 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. On the basis of the published evidences and consensus of European experts, this study provides an updated overview on clinical applications and technical procedures of SLN biopsy in vulvar cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

SLN biopsy is nowadays the standard treatment for well-selected women with clinically negative lymph nodes. Negative SLN is associated with a low groin recurrence rate and a good 5-year disease-specific survival rate. SLN biopsy is the most cost-effective approach than lymphadenectomy in early-stage vulvar cancer. However, future trials should focus on the safe extension of the indication of SLN biopsy in vulvar cancer. Although radiotracers and optical agents are widely used in the clinical routine, there is an increasing interest for hybrid tracers like indocyanine-^99mTc-nanocolloid. Finally, it is essential to standardise the acquisition protocol including SPECT/CT images, and due to the low incidence of this type of malignancy to centralise this procedure in experienced centres for personalised approach.