Robot-assisted laparoscopic antegrade versus open inguinal lymphadenectomy: a retrospective controlled study

Comparing the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery and open inguinal lymph node dissection in penile cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open inguinal lymph node dissection (O-ILND) in penile cancer.

METHODS

We performed a systematic reviews and cumulative meta-analyses of primary results of interest according to PRISMA criteria, and quality assessment followed AMSTAR. The system searched five databases, including Zhiwang, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The search period ranged was from database creation until September 2023. The statistical analysis software used Stata16.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies, including 898 patients. Compared to O-ILND, MIS is superior in length of stay (WMD = -2.96, 95%CI [-4.38, -1.54], P < 0.05), drainage time (WMD = -3.24, 95%CI [-4.70, -1.78], P < 0.05) and estimated blood loss (WMD = -35.70, 95%CI [-46.27, -25.14], P < 0.05), while operation time, recurrence rate and 5-year overall survival rate are the same. The number of lymph nodes dissection between the two groups are not statistically significant. Subgroup analyses found that there are more lymph nodes dissection in robotic-assisted inguinal lymph nodes dissection (WMD = 0.50, 95%CI [0.20, 0.80], P < 0.05). The overall complication rate of MIS was lower (OR = 0.26, 95%CI [0.09, 0.70], P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive inguinal lymph nodes dissection appears to be a better option for penile cancer cases. But more large samples and multicenter studies are needed to further confirm.

Robot-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomy to treat penile and vulvar cancers: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Inguinal lymph nodes dissection (ILND) is recommended in patients presenting with high-risk penile (PC) or vulvar cancers (VC). Though, this surgical procedure is underused because of its anticipated morbidity. Minimally invasive approaches were proposed to minimize complications associated with open surgery. In this review, we analyze current available data exploring intra and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted ILND (RAIL).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

On April 9th, 2023, a literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Scopus databases. The search employed the combination of the following terms: ("robotic assisted" OR "robot-assisted" OR "robotic") AND ("inguinal lymph node dissection" OR "lymphadenectomy") AND ("penile cancer" OR "vulvar cancer"). Out of the 404 identified articles, 18 were used for the present scoping review and their results were reported according to the PRISMA statement.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Data on 171 patients, ranging in age from 32 to 85 years, were obtained. Most of them (90.6%) harbored a penile squamous cell carcinoma and presented with no palpable nodes (85%). Operation time (OT) ranged between 45 and 300 min. Estimated blood loss varied from 10 to 300 mL. One single intra-operative complication was reported and one conversion to open was recorded. The lymph nodes (LNs) count spanned from 3 to 26 per groin, with 17 studies reporting a median yield >7 nodes. Hospital stay was 1-7 days, while the duration of drainage ranged from 4 to 72 days. Post-operative complications included lymphocele (22.2%; 0-100%), lymphedema (13.4%; 0-40%), cellulitis (11.1%; 0-25%), skin necrosis (8.7%; 0-15.4%). seroma (3.5%; 0-20%) and wound breakdown/wound infection (2.9%; 0-10%). Out of the included studies, 7 provided at least a 12-month follow-up, with recurrence-free rates ranging from 50% to 100% in patients affected by penile cancer and from 92% to 100% in vulvar cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence on RAIL for the treatment of PC and VC is limited. The approach appears to be safe and effective, as it provides an adequate lymph node yield while ensuring a minimally morbid postoperative course and a short hospital stay.

Management of Lymph Node-positive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Lymph node (LN) involvement in penile cancer is associated with poor survival. Early diagnosis and management significantly impact survival, with multimodal treatment approaches often considered in advanced disease.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness of treatment options available for the management of inguinal and pelvic lymphadenopathy in men with penile cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and other databases were searched from 1990 to July 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomised comparative studies (NRCSs), and case series (CSs) were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We identified 107 studies, involving 9582 patients from two RCTs, 28 NRCSs, and 77 CSs. The quality of evidence is considered poor. Surgery is the mainstay of LN disease management, with early inguinal LN dissection (ILND) associated with better outcomes. Videoendoscopic ILND may offer comparable survival outcomes to open ILND with lower wound-related morbidity. Ipsilateral pelvic LN dissection (PLND) in N2-3 cases improves overall survival in comparison to no pelvic surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in N2-3 disease showed a pathological complete response rate of 13% and an objective response rate of 51%. Adjuvant radiotherapy may benefit pN2-3 but not pN1 disease. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy may provide a small survival benefit in N3 disease. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy improve outcomes after PLND for pelvic LN metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Early LND improves survival in nodal disease in penile cancer. Multimodal treatments may provide additional benefit in pN2-3 cases; however, data are limited. Therefore, individualised management of patients with nodal disease should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Spread of penile cancer to the lymph nodes is best managed with surgery, which improves survival and has curative potential. Supplementary treatment, including the use of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, may further improve survival in advanced disease. Patients with penile cancer with lymph node involvement should be treated by a multidisciplinary team.

Comparison of antegrade robotic assisted VS laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive modifications of inguinal lymphadenectomy (IL), including laparoscopic IL (LIL) and robotic-assisted IL (RAIL), have been utilized for penile cancer. Comparative study is necessary to guide the decision about which minimally invasive technique to select for IL. Therefore we compared RAIL with LIL performed via an antegrade approach in terms of perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 43 patients who underwent RAIL (n = 20) or LIL (n = 23) for penile cancer from 2016 to 2020. The key surgical procedures and techniques are described. Complications were graded by the Clavien-Dindo classification, and operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), lymph nodal yield, nodal positivity, postoperative drain duration, and disease recurrence during follow-up were assessed. Categorical variables were compared using chi-squared whereas continuous variables were compared by t-tests.

RESULTS

The operative time for RAIL was significantly shorter than that of LIL (median 83 vs 95 min). Significantly less blood loss was reported with RAIL than with LIL (median 10 vs 35 ml). Lymph node yield, pathological positive nodes, the hospital stay, postoperative drain duration, postoperative complications and recurrence were similar for RAIL and LIL.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with penile cancer, perioperative outcomes of RAIL and LIL were similar, but there was less blood loss, a shorter operative time for robotic cases.

Robotic surgery in comparison to the open and laparoscopic approaches in the field of urology: a systematic review

To establish the feasibility of robotic surgical procedures in urology in terms of the applications, merits, and demerits as well as the postoperative and oncological outcomes while comparing it with the conventional approaches. A systematic search of electronic databases was performed to identify Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort studies on Robot-Assisted urological surgical procedures in comparison with the conventional methods. The quality assessment of included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the revised Cochrane "Risk of Bias" tool. A qualitative narrative synthesis of the data extracted from the studies was performed and presented in tabulated form. After screening, 39 studies were included in our review (7 Randomized Controlled Trials and 32 Cohort studies). Robot-Assisted Prostatectomy appears to be associated with lower estimated blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay. For Robot-Assisted Cystectomy, the results suggest longer operative time and fewer complications. Robot-Assisted Radical Nephrectomy was found to be associated with fewer perioperative complications and longer mean operative time while Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy was associated with less positive surgical margins and reduced need for postoperative analgesia. The mean operative time was longer while the length of stay was shorter for the robotic approach in inguinal lymphadenectomy and ureteral reimplantation. The feasibility of Robot-Assisted surgery varied for different outcome measures as well as for different procedures. Some common advantages were a shorter length of stay, lesser blood loss, and fewer complications while the drawbacks included longer operative time.Study protocol PROSPERO database (Registration Number: CRD42021256623).

“Light green up”: Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging–guided Robotic Bilateral Inguinal Lymphadenectomy by the Hypogastric Subcutaneous Approach for Penile Cancer

Background

Inguinal lymphadenectomy is of great significance in the management of penile cancer, which aims to mitigate the progression of lymph node metastasis. It is important to improve the efficiency of lymph node dissection and reduce surgical complications.

Objective

To detail a novel technique for robotic bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy through the hypogastric subcutaneous approach by indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging, which promotes the identification and dissection of inguinal lymph nodes with considerable safety.

Design, setting, and participants

Ten eligible penile cancer patients who underwent ICG fluorescence imaging–guided robotic bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy were prospectively enrolled (ICG group). Sixteen patients who underwent the surgery without ICG were retrospectively set as the control (non-ICG) group. Follow-up records for at least 12 mo were required.

Surgical procedure

Inguinal lymphadenectomy was performed by the hypogastric subcutaneous approach. The ICG solution was subcutaneously injected into the prepuce at the beginning of surgery, and ICG fluorescence imaging–guided robotic-assisted bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy was conducted.

Measurements

Clinical outcomes were collected. The primary study outcome measurement was the number of dissected inguinal lymph nodes.

Results and limitations

The numbers of inguinal overall, superficial, and deep lymph nodes retrieved were all higher in the ICG than in the non-ICG group (p < 0.05). No patients had severe perioperative complications. No difference was found in the overall complication rate and 12-mo survival between two groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

ICG fluorescence imaging–guided robotic inguinal lymphadenectomy via the hypogastric subcutaneous approach is feasible and safe for patients with penile cancer, which is beneficial for dissecting more inguinal lymph nodes with few surgical complications.

Patient summary

We developed a promising indocyanine green fluorescence imaging–guided technique to perform robotic bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy on patients with penile cancer, which conduces to remove more inguinal lymph nodes with limited complications.

Robot-Assisted Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection for Carcinoma Penis

Inguinal lymph node status is the single most important prognostic factor for survival in patients with carcinoma penis. Various modifications and alternatives to open inguinal lymph node dissection have been developed as the same is associated with high postoperative morbidity such as wound infection, skin flap necrosis, lymphorrhea, and lymphedema. Robot-assisted video endoscopic inguinal lymph node dissection (RA-VEIL) has the potential to accomplish thorough inguinal lymph node dissection with definitively reduced postoperative morbidity. In this video, we demonstrate our technique of RA-VEIL: The fascia lata first approach and highlight our technical modifications of the conventionally described procedure.

Single-position robotic assisted laparoscopic anterograde bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy versus laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: A retrospective controlled study

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of this study was to compare the surgical strategy and clinical outcomes of single-position robotic assisted laparoscopic anterograde bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

21 patients were diagnosis with squamous cell carcinoma and identified from March 2010 to December 2020 in our department. Ten patients were received single-position robotic assisted laparoscopic anterograde bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy (robot-assisted group), and eleven patients underwent laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (laparoscopic group). Preoperative physical examination and related auxiliary examinations all indicated bilateral inguinal lymph node enlargement, and there was no distant metastasis patient presented during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

There was no intraoperative conversion to open surgery. The operation time under robot-assisted group was 104 ± 13 min which was significantly shorter than laparoscopic group (136 ± 11 min, P < 0.01). The average number of lymph nodes was 22.2 ± 4.5 of both sides in robot-assisted group, which was statistically different compared with laparoscopic group (15.4 ± 3.1, p < 0.01). Moreover, there was significant difference of hospitalization cost between two groups (CNY 67429 ± 5586 vs 28582 ± 3774, P < 0.01). No differences in operation time, blood loss, and length of stay were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The single-position robotic assisted laparoscopic anterograde bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy reveals with shorter operating time, and better surgical effect, Moreover, we prefer to no change the trocars layout and mechanical arm system during the operation.

Minimal invasive approaches in lymph node management of carcinoma of penis: A review

INTRODUCTION

Inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) is an integral part in the management of carcinoma penis. The concerns about the postoperative morbidity associated with open ILND led to modification in the template of dissection and adoption of minimally invasive techniques such as video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and robotic-assisted VEIL (R-VEIL). In this review, we aim to describe the techniques, case selection, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes of VEIL and R-VEIL and to compare it with open ILND.

METHODS

Databases of PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched to identify the articles for VEIL and R-VEIL. Using PRISMA guidelines, literature search yielded 3783 articles, of which 32 full-text articles relevant to the topic were selected and reviewed, after consensus from authors.

RESULTS

After the first description of VEIL, various modifications in port placements and approaches were described. Several studies have shown, VEIL and R VEIL are safe and feasible in both node-negative and node-positive Ca penis patients. Compared to open ILND, VEIL had fewer wound infections and skin necrosis, minimal blood loss, shorter mean hospital stays, and reduced duration of drain kept. There is no difference in mean lymph node yield and recurrence rates between open ILND, VEIL, R-VEIL.

CONCLUSION

VEIL and R-VEIL are safe and have comparable oncological outcomes with open ILND.

Robotic-Assisted Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (RAVEIL) and Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) versus Open Inguinal Lymph-Node Dissection (OILND) in carcinoma of penis: Comparison of perioperative outcomes, complications and oncological outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the peri-operative outcomes, complications, and oncological outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (RAVEIL)/Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) with Open Inguinal Lymph-Node Dissection (OILND) for management of inguinal lymph-nodes in carcinoma of the penis.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in January 2021 using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Data from human studies comparing RAVEIL/VEIL vs. OILND in carcinoma of penis published in English was extracted and analyzed by two independent authors.

RESULTS

Two Randomised Controlled Trials and 6 cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. RAVEIL/VEIL group exhibited increased operative time (Mean Difference [MD] = 15.28 [14.19; 16.38], P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (MD = -1.06 [-1.14; -0.98], P < 0.001), and decreased duration of drainage (MD = -2.82 [-3.21; -2.43], P < 0.001), wound infection (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.15 [0.08; 0.27], P < 0.001), skin necrosis (OR = 0.12 [0.05; 0.28], P < 0.001), lymphedema (OR = 0.41 [0.24; 0.72], P = 0.002), and major complications (OR = 0.11 [0.05; 0.24], P < 0.001) as compared to OILND group. Recurrence rate and number of deaths were comparable in both the groups. RAVEIL/VEIL groups showed slightly larger lymph-node yield (MD = 0.44 [0.18; 0.70], P < 0.001) as compared to OILND group.

CONCLUSION

RAVEIL/VEIL has lesser skin complications, lymphedema, and better lymph-node yield as compared to OILND. It is comparable in terms of lymphocele and recurrence. It has lesser hospital stay and duration of drainage but owing to heterogeneity, the results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies are required to determine long-term oncological outcomes like overall survival and disease-specific survival.