Role of systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in delayed debulking surgery after six neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles for high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma

Role of systematic lymphadenectomy at the time of interval debulking surgery for patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma who achieved complete gross resection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of systematic lymphadenectomy at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery for patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma who achieved complete gross resection.

METHODS

The National Cancer DataBase was accessed, and patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with advanced-stage ovarian carcinoma who underwent interval cytoreductive surgery and achieved complete gross resection were identified. Patients who did not undergo lymphadenectomy and those who underwent systematic lymphadenectomy (defined as at least 20 lymph nodes removed) were selected for further analysis. Median overall survival was compared with the log-rank test and controlled for a priori selected confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 1060 patients were identified. Systematic lymphadenectomy was performed for 125 (11.8%) patients with a median of 29 lymph nodes (range 20-72) removed. Rate of lymph node metastasis was 62.4%. Patients who underwent systematic lymphadenectomy had higher rate of unplanned readmission (8.9% vs 1.6%, p<0.001), and median hospital stay (6 vs 4 days, p<0.001). Median overall survival for patients who did and did not undergo systematic lymphadenectomy was 44.2 and 40.4 months, respectively, p=0.40. After controlling for confounders, performance of systematic lymphadenectomy was not associated with better survival (HR=0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19).

CONCLUSION

Systematic lymphadenectomy is rarely performed at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery and not associated with a survival benefit for patients who achieved complete gross resection.

Systematic lymph node dissection during interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of systematic lymph node dissection (SyLND) at the time of interval debulking surgery (IDS) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC).

METHODS

Systematic literature review of studies including AEOC patients undergoing SyLND versus selective lymph node dissection (SeLND) or no lymph node dissection (NoLND) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included severe postoperative complications, lymphocele, lymphedema, blood loss, blood transfusions, operative time, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Nine retrospective studies met the eligibility criteria, involving a total of 1,660 patients: 827 (49.8%) SyLND, 490 (29.5%) SeLND, and 343 (20.7%) NoLND. The pooled estimated hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were, respectively, 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.65-1.20; p=0.43) and 0.80 (95% CI=0.50-1.30; p=0.37). The pooled estimated odds ratios (ORs) for severe postoperative complications, lymphocele, lymphedema, and blood transfusions were, respectively, 1.83 (95% CI=1.19-2.82; p=0.006), 3.38 (95% CI=1.71-6.70; p<0.001), 7.23 (95% CI=3.40-15.36; p<0.0001), and 1.22 (95% CI=0.50-2.96; p=0.67).

CONCLUSION

Despite the heterogeneity in the study designs, SyLND after NACT failed to demonstrate a significant improvement in PFS and OS and resulted in a higher risk of severe postoperative complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42022303577.