Saphenous-sparing laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy

Inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer patients: a comparison between open and video endoscopic approach in a multicenter setting

OBJECTIVES

To compare differences of operative outcomes, post-operative complications and survival outcomes between open and laparoscopic cases in a multicenter study.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study performed at three European centers from September 2011 to January 2019. The surgeon decision to perform open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL) or video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) was done in each hospital after patient counselling. Inclusion criteria regarded a minimum follow-up of 9 months since the inguinal lymphadenectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients with proven squamous cell penile cancer underwent inguinal lymphadenectomy. 26 of them underwent OIL, while 29 patients underwent VEIL. For the OIL and VEIL groups, the mean operative time was 2.5 vs. 3.4 h (p=0.129), respectively. Hospital stays were lower in the VEIL group with 4 vs. 8 days in OIL patients (p=0.053) while number of days requiring drains to remain in situ was 3 vs. 6 days (p=0.024). The VEIL group reported a lower incidence of major complications compared to the OIL group (2 vs. 17%, p=0.0067) while minor complications were comparable in both groups. In a median follow-up period of 60 months, the overall survival was 65.5 and 84.6% in OIL and VEIL groups, respectively (p=0.105).

CONCLUSIONS

VEIL is comparable to OIL regarding safety, overall survival and post-operative outcomes.

Combined Reporting of Surgical Quality and Cancer Control after Surgical Treatment for Penile Tumors with Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection: The Tetrafecta Achievement

BACKGROUND

To optimize results reporting after penile cancer (PC) surgery, we proposed a Tetrafecta and assessed its ability to predict overall survival (OS) probabilities.

METHODS

A purpose-built multicenter, multi-national database was queried for stage I-IIIB PC, requiring inguinal lymphadenectomy (ILND), from 2015 onwards. Kaplan-Meier (KM) method assessed differences in OS between patients achieving Tetrafecta or not. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses identified its predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 154 patients were included in the analysis. The 45 patients (29%) that achieved the Tetrafecta were younger (59 vs. 62 years; p = 0.01) and presented with fewer comorbidities (ASA score ≥ 3: 0% vs. 24%; p < 0.001). Although indicated, ILND was omitted in 8 cases (5%), while in 16, a modified template was properly used. Although median LNs yield was 17 (IQR: 11-27), 35% of the patients had <7 nodes retrieved from the groin. At Kaplan-Maier analysis, the Tetrafecta cohort displayed significantly higher OS probabilities (Log Rank = 0.01). Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analyses identified age as the only independent predictor of Tetrafecta achievement (OR: 0.97; 95%CI: 0.94-0.99; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our Tetrafecta is the first combined outcome to comprehensively report results after PC surgery. It is widely applicable, based on standardized and reproducible variables and it predicts all-cause mortality.

Inguinal lymph node dissection in the era of minimally invasive surgical technology

BACKGROUND

Inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) is an essential step in both treatment and staging of several malignancies including penile and vulvar cancers. Various open, video endoscopic, and robotic-assisted techniques have been utilized so far. In this review, we aim to describe available minimally invasive surgical approaches for ILND, and review their outcomes and complications.

METHODS

The PubMed, Wiley Online Library, and Science Direct databases were reviewed in February 2020 to find relevant studies published in English within 2000-2020.

FINDINGS

There are different minimally invasive platforms available to accomplish dissection of inguinal nodes without jeopardizing oncological results while minimizing postoperative complications. Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy and Robotic Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy are safe and achieve the same nodal yield, a surrogate metric for oncological adequacy. When compared to open technique, Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy and Robotic Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy may offer faster postoperative recovery and fewer postoperative complications including wound dehiscence, necrosis, and infection. The relatively high rate and severity of postoperative complications hinders utilization of recommended ILND for oncologic indications. Minimally invasive approaches, using laparoscopic or robotic-assisted platforms, show some promise in reducing the morbidity of this procedure while achieving adequate short and intermediate term oncological outcomes.

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.

Technical management of inguinal lymph-nodes in penile cancer: open versus minimal invasive

Inguinal lymphadenectomy (ILND) remains the standard of care for patients with invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis, dictating patient prognosis, adjuvant therapies, and surveillance strategies. Importantly the performance of an ILND has been shown to improve cancer-specific outcomes, providing a modifiable factor for patients with an aggressive malignancy. Surprisingly, the procedure remains underutilized, mainly due to the high surgical morbidity associated with the procedure. The open lymphadenectomy technique has undergone several modifications over the last 30 years to minimize its associated surgical morbidity, but wound-related complications remain significant. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have been recently introduced to help mitigate wound-related complications associated with open lymphadenectomy, with promising results. In this review, we highlight the importance of ILND, present a detail review of the surgical and oncological outcomes associated with open, laparoscopic and robotic ILND for patients with penile cancer.

Role for fibrin glue (sealant) in seroma reduction after inguinal lymphadenectomy; a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Seroma is one of the most commonly encountered morbidities after inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND). It causes much nuisance to both patients and doctors and its presence can lead to many complications. This study aimed to evaluate the role and impact of using fibrin glue to decrease seroma formation in patients undergoing ILND.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-two patients underwent ILND for various reasons. The patients were randomly divided into two groups; 16 in each group. In one group, fibrin glue sealant was applied with a dosage of 2 ml per 100 cm² surface area. Drain placement was then performed. In the control group, only drain placement was used. Preoperative, operative and postoperative data were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the incidence of seroma formation favoring the fibrin glue group when compared to the control group (P = 0.022). There was also a significant reduction of total cumulative amount of serous fluid (P < 0.001), time to remove drains (P < 0.001), and hospital stay (P = 0.012). There was no significant difference between the two groups in occurrences of hematoma, infection or superficial skin edge necrosis.

CONCLUSION

Fibrin glue sealant has a role to play in ILND as it significantly reduced the incidence of seroma formation. Standardization of definition of seroma as well as dosage and technique of fibrin glue have to be reached in future studies to determine the true role of fibrin glue in ILND.