Endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer: oncological and functional outcomes and long-term morbidity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48193/revistamexicanadeurologa.v82i5.966Keywords:
cancer, penile, lymphadenectomy, inguinal, endoscopic, trifectaAbstract
Objective: To present our experience in Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (IEL) in the management of penile cancer with risk factors for metastasis and clinically negative inguinal nodes (cN0); to evaluate the results obtained in the long term and with those described in the literature review, proposing "ideal objectives" for this minimally invasive technique.
Methodology: Between 2012 and 2016, patients diagnosed with penile cancer who met the criteria for pathology greater than pT1G2 and cN0 inguinal nodes underwent IEL. We recorded pre-surgical, perioperative, pathological and follow-up data. We analyze results and discuss the evidence described in the literature review.
Results: In 15 patients with a mean age of 59 years, 23 IELs were performed (08 bilateral and 07 unilateral). The average operative time was 126 minutes; all cases with bleeding less than 50cc. The mean number of lymph nodes dissected per inguinal region was 10.4; in 3 patients, 1 metastatic node was found. There were no Clavien-Dindo III or IV complications. During the mean follow-up period of 89 months (range 72-120), no patient had disease recurrence or progression.
Conclusions: Long-term evaluation in this group of patients has shown to be an effective, safe and reproducible alternative with optimal results in cancer control, prompt functional recovery and minimum intra and postoperative complications. The various publications coincide in affirming that it has advantages compared to the conventional one, fulfilling these three “ideal objectives” that we qualify as a trifecta, like the concept used in other urooncological surgeries.
References
Hakenberg O. Guidelines on Penile Cancer. European Association of Urology; 2022.
Tobias-Machado M, Tavares A, Molina WR, Zambon JP, Medina JA, Forseto PH, et al. Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL): initial case report and comparison with open radical procedure. Arch Esp Urol. 2006;59(8):849–52. doi: https://doi.org/10.4321/s0004-06142006000800020
Sotelo R, Sánchez-Salas R, Carmona O, Garcia A, Mariano M, Neiva G, et al. Endoscopic lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma. J Endourol. 2007;21(4):364–7; discussion 367. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9971
Astigueta JCP, Abad-Licham M, Silva E, Yan E, Álvarez H, Agreda F, et al. Endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer: case report and literature review. Ecancermedicalscience. 2015;9:576. doi: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2015.576
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
Pow-Sang MR, Ferreira U, Pow-Sang JM, Nardi AC, Destefano V. Epidemiology and natural history of penile cancer. Urology. 2010;76(2 Suppl 1): S2-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.003
Pettaway CA, Crook JM, Pagliaro LC. Tumors of the Penis. In: Partin AWM, Peters CA, Kavoussi LRM, Dmochowski RRM, Wein AJ, editors. Campbell-Walsh Urology 12th Edition. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2020. p. 1742–75.
Sotelo R, Medina LG, Machado MT. Inguinal Node Dissection. In: Partin AWM, Peters CA, Kavoussi LRM, Dmochowski RRM, Wein AJ, editors. Campbell-Walsh Urology 12th Edition. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2020.. p. 1790–803.
Hu J, Li H, Cui Y, Liu P, Zhou X, Liu L, et al. Comparison of clinical feasibility and oncological outcomes between video endoscopic and open inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(22):e15862. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000015862
Cui Y, Chen H, Liu L, Chen Z, Chen J, Qi L, et al. Saphenous vein sparing during laparoscopic bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma patients. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48(3):363–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-015-1182-y
Graafland NM, Lam W, Leijte JAP, Yap T, Gallee MPW, Corbishley C, et al. Prognostic factors for occult inguinal lymph node involvement in penile carcinoma and assessment of the high-risk EAU subgroup: a two-institution analysis of 342 clinically node-negative patients. Eur Urol. 2010;58(5):742–7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.015
Kumar V, Sethia KK. Prospective study comparing video-endoscopic radical inguinal lymph node dissection (VEILND) with open radical ILND (OILND) for penile cancer over an 8-year period. BJU Int. 2017;119(4):530–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13660
Muñoz Guillermo V, Rosino Sánchez A, Rivero Guerra Á, Barceló Bayonas I, Pardo Martínez A, Jiménez Peralta D, et al. Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer: Systematic review. Arch Esp Urol. 2019;72(10):992–9.
Patel KN, Salunke A, Bakshi G, Jayaprakash D, Pandya SJ. 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. Urol Oncol. 2022;40(3):112.e11-112.e22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.11.010
Josephson DY, Jacobsohn KM, Link BA, Wilson TG. Robotic-assisted Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy. Urology. 2009;73(1):167–70. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.05.060
Singh A, Jaipuria J, Goel A, Shah S, Bhardwaj R, Baidya S, et al. Comparing Outcomes of Robotic and Open Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Carcinoma of the Penis. J Urol. 2018;199(6):1518–25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.061
Tamhankar AS, Ojha SP, Ahluwalia P, Gautam G. Technical caveats in robot assisted video endoscopic inguinal lymph node dissection - evolution of a modified technique. Int Braz J Urol. 2021;47(1):216–7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0298
Tobias-Machado M, Correa WF, Reis LO, Starling ES, de Castro Neves O, Juliano RV, et al. Single-site video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy: initial report. J Endourol. 2011;25(4):607–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0269
Yuan P, Zhao C, Liu Z, Ou Z, He W, Cai Y, et al. Comparative Study of Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy Through a Hypogastric vs Leg Subcutaneous Approach for Penile Cancer. J Endourol. 2018;32(1):66–72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0455
Subirá-Ríos D, Moncada I, Caño-Velasco J, González-García J, Polanco-Pujol L, Subirá-Rios J, et al. Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic Technique for Lymph Node Dissection in Penile Cancer: The Pelvic and Inguinal Single-Site Approach: PISA Technique. Urology. 2021;153:351–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.04.017
Nayak SP, Pokharkar H, Gurawalia J, Dev K, Chanduri S, Vijayakumar M. Efficacy and Safety of Lateral Approach-Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (L-VEIL) over Open Inguinal Block Dissection: a Retrospective Study. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2019;10(3):555–62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-019-00951-4
Herrel L, Butterworth R, Jafri S, Ying C, Delman K, Kooby D, et al. Bilateral endoscopic inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy using simultaneous carbon dioxide insufflation: an initial report of a novel approach. The Canadian journal of urology. 2012;19(3).
Shanjin Ma, Keying Zhang, Ruixiao Li, Jiazhen Lu, Tao Wu, Zhiwei Liu, et al. Bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy using simultaneous double laparoscopies for penile cancer: A retrospective study. Urol Oncol. 2022 Mar;40(3):112.e1-112.e9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.12.022
Chen J, Yan L, Luo G, Fang W, Liang C. Clinical Application of Noninflating Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection. Comput Math Methods Med. 2022;2022:8259990. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8259990
Das MK, Pandey A, Mandal S, Nayak P, Kumaraswamy S. Modified Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy: a Deep-First Approach. Urology. 2022;168:234–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2022.06.005
Russell CM, Salami SS, Niemann A, Weizer AZ, Tomlins SA, Morgan TM, et al. Minimally Invasive Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in the Management of Penile Carcinoma. Urology. 2017;106:113–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.022
Yadav SS, Tomar V, Bhattar R, Jha AK, Priyadarshi S. Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy vs Open Inguinal Lymphadenectomy for Carcinoma Penis: Expanding Role and Comparison of Outcomes. Urology. 2018;113:79–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.007
Shao Y, Hu X, Ren S, Liao D, Yang Z, Liu Y, et al. Comparison of different surgical methods and strategies for inguinal lymph node dissection in patients with penile cancer. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):2560. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06494-z
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Mexicana de Urología
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
