Cargando…
Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy
INTRODUCTION: Patients with stage II germ-cell tumours (GCT) usually undergo radiotherapy (seminoma only) or chemotherapy. Both strategies display a recognised risk of long-term side effects. We evaluated retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) as exclusive treatment in stage II GCT. METHODS:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35915559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03008916221112697 |
_version_ | 1785076747972116480 |
---|---|
author | Nicolai, Nicola Nazzani, Sebastiano Tesone, Antonio Macchi, Alberto Piva, Luigi Salvioni, Roberto Stagni, Silvia Torelli, Tullio Agostini, Edoardo Celso, Francesco Giannatempo, Patrizia Procopio, Giuseppe Avuzzi, Barbara Lanocita, Rodolfo Cattaneo, Laura Catanzaro, Mario Biasoni, Davide |
author_facet | Nicolai, Nicola Nazzani, Sebastiano Tesone, Antonio Macchi, Alberto Piva, Luigi Salvioni, Roberto Stagni, Silvia Torelli, Tullio Agostini, Edoardo Celso, Francesco Giannatempo, Patrizia Procopio, Giuseppe Avuzzi, Barbara Lanocita, Rodolfo Cattaneo, Laura Catanzaro, Mario Biasoni, Davide |
author_sort | Nicolai, Nicola |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Patients with stage II germ-cell tumours (GCT) usually undergo radiotherapy (seminoma only) or chemotherapy. Both strategies display a recognised risk of long-term side effects. We evaluated retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) as exclusive treatment in stage II GCT. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2019 included, 66 selected stage II GCT patients underwent primary open (O-) or laparoscopic (L-)RPLND. Type of procedure and extent of dissection, operative time, node rescue, hospital stay, complications (according to Clavien-Dindo), administration of chemotherapy, relapse and site of relapse were evaluated. RESULTS: Five patients had pure testicular seminoma. Nineteen (28.8%) had raised markers prior to RPLND; 48 (72.7%), 16 (24.2%) and two (3.0%) were stage IIA, IIB and IIC, respectively. O-RPLND and unilateral L-RPLND were 36 and 30 respectively. Six stage II A patients (12.5%) had negative nodes. Four patients underwent immediate adjuvant chemotherapy. One patient was lost at follow-up. After a median follow-up of 29 months, 48 (77.4%) of the 62 patients undergoing RPLND alone remained recurrence-free; one patient had an in-field recurrence following a bilateral dissection. According to procedure, number of rescued nodes (O-RPLND: 25. IQR 21-31; L-RPLND: 20, IQR 15-26; p: 0.001), hospital stay (L-RPLND: 3 days, IQR 3-4; O-RPLND: 6 days, IQR 5-8; p: .001) and grade ≥2 complications (L-RPLND 7%, O-RPLND 22%; p: 0.1) were the only significant differences. CONCLUSION: Primary RPLND is safe in stage II GCT, including seminoma, and may warrant a cure rate greater than 70%. When feasible, L-RPLND may be as effective as O-RPLND with better tolerability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10363949 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103639492023-07-25 Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy Nicolai, Nicola Nazzani, Sebastiano Tesone, Antonio Macchi, Alberto Piva, Luigi Salvioni, Roberto Stagni, Silvia Torelli, Tullio Agostini, Edoardo Celso, Francesco Giannatempo, Patrizia Procopio, Giuseppe Avuzzi, Barbara Lanocita, Rodolfo Cattaneo, Laura Catanzaro, Mario Biasoni, Davide Tumori Original Research Articles INTRODUCTION: Patients with stage II germ-cell tumours (GCT) usually undergo radiotherapy (seminoma only) or chemotherapy. Both strategies display a recognised risk of long-term side effects. We evaluated retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) as exclusive treatment in stage II GCT. METHODS: Between 2008 and 2019 included, 66 selected stage II GCT patients underwent primary open (O-) or laparoscopic (L-)RPLND. Type of procedure and extent of dissection, operative time, node rescue, hospital stay, complications (according to Clavien-Dindo), administration of chemotherapy, relapse and site of relapse were evaluated. RESULTS: Five patients had pure testicular seminoma. Nineteen (28.8%) had raised markers prior to RPLND; 48 (72.7%), 16 (24.2%) and two (3.0%) were stage IIA, IIB and IIC, respectively. O-RPLND and unilateral L-RPLND were 36 and 30 respectively. Six stage II A patients (12.5%) had negative nodes. Four patients underwent immediate adjuvant chemotherapy. One patient was lost at follow-up. After a median follow-up of 29 months, 48 (77.4%) of the 62 patients undergoing RPLND alone remained recurrence-free; one patient had an in-field recurrence following a bilateral dissection. According to procedure, number of rescued nodes (O-RPLND: 25. IQR 21-31; L-RPLND: 20, IQR 15-26; p: 0.001), hospital stay (L-RPLND: 3 days, IQR 3-4; O-RPLND: 6 days, IQR 5-8; p: .001) and grade ≥2 complications (L-RPLND 7%, O-RPLND 22%; p: 0.1) were the only significant differences. CONCLUSION: Primary RPLND is safe in stage II GCT, including seminoma, and may warrant a cure rate greater than 70%. When feasible, L-RPLND may be as effective as O-RPLND with better tolerability. SAGE Publications 2022-08-01 2023-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10363949/ /pubmed/35915559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03008916221112697 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Articles Nicolai, Nicola Nazzani, Sebastiano Tesone, Antonio Macchi, Alberto Piva, Luigi Salvioni, Roberto Stagni, Silvia Torelli, Tullio Agostini, Edoardo Celso, Francesco Giannatempo, Patrizia Procopio, Giuseppe Avuzzi, Barbara Lanocita, Rodolfo Cattaneo, Laura Catanzaro, Mario Biasoni, Davide Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title | Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title_full | Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title_fullStr | Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title_full_unstemmed | Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title_short | Retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (RPLND) as upfront management in stage II germ-cell tumours: Evaluation of safety and efficacy |
title_sort | retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection (rplnd) as upfront management in stage ii germ-cell tumours: evaluation of safety and efficacy |
topic | Original Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35915559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03008916221112697 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nicolainicola retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT nazzanisebastiano retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT tesoneantonio retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT macchialberto retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT pivaluigi retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT salvioniroberto retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT stagnisilvia retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT torellitullio retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT agostiniedoardo retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT celsofrancesco retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT giannatempopatrizia retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT procopiogiuseppe retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT avuzzibarbara retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT lanocitarodolfo retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT cattaneolaura retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT catanzaromario retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy AT biasonidavide retroperitoneallymphnodedissectionrplndasupfrontmanagementinstageiigermcelltumoursevaluationofsafetyandefficacy |