Cargando…

Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection

Background: Post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) plays a crucial role in treatment of metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer. Objective: To evaluate the functional outcome regarding the preservation of ejaculatory function comparing a bilateral vs. unilateral temp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hiester, Andreas, Nini, Alessandro, Fingerhut, Anna, große Siemer, Robert, Winter, Christian, Albers, Peter, Lusch, Achim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6345078/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705885
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00080
_version_ 1783389524163821568
author Hiester, Andreas
Nini, Alessandro
Fingerhut, Anna
große Siemer, Robert
Winter, Christian
Albers, Peter
Lusch, Achim
author_facet Hiester, Andreas
Nini, Alessandro
Fingerhut, Anna
große Siemer, Robert
Winter, Christian
Albers, Peter
Lusch, Achim
author_sort Hiester, Andreas
collection PubMed
description Background: Post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) plays a crucial role in treatment of metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer. Objective: To evaluate the functional outcome regarding the preservation of ejaculatory function comparing a bilateral vs. unilateral template resection in PC-RPLND patients. In addition, oncological safety and perioperative complications of the unilateral template resection was compared to the full bilateral one. Design/Setting/Participants: Between 2003 and 2018, 504 RPLNDs have been performed in 434 patients. The database of consecutive patients was queried to identify 171 patients with PC-RPLND after 1st line chemotherapy for a non-seminoma with or without bilateral template resection. Re-Do's, late relapse, salvage patients, and thoraco-abdominal approaches were excluded. Indication for a template resection was a unilateral residual mass mainly <5 cm as published (1). Outcome, Measurement, and Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistics were used to report preoperative features, postoperative outcomes and patterns of recurrence, on the overall population and after stratification for the type of resection (bilateral vs. unilateral). Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to describe recurrence- and cancer-specific mortality-free survival rates at different time points. Results and Limitations: Overall, 90 and 81 patients underwent unilateral and bilateral radical resection, respectively. Median size of residual mass was 7 cm for bilateral and 4 cm for unilateral template resection. Clinical stage II and III were present in 31 and 69% of patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 14.5 months (IQR 3.3–37.6). The 1- and 2-year recurrence-free survival rates were 91 and 91%, and 77 and 72% for patients treated with unilateral template and bilateral resection, respectively (p = 0.0078). Median time to recurrence was 9.5 and 9 months in template and bilateral resection group, respectively. Adjunctive procedures were performed in 56 patients (33%) and were significantly more frequent in the bilateral resection group (43 vs. 23%, p = 0.006). The overall high-grade complication rate (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) was 6, 3, and 9% in unilateral template and bilateral resection group, respectively (p = 0.6). The rate of preservation of antegrade ejaculation was significantly higher in the unilateral group. Conclusions: Antegrade ejaculation in patients undergoing unilateral template resection with a residual mass <5 cm can be preserved at a much higher rate. Moreover, this surgical procedure is oncologically safe in terms of mid-term recurrence and CSM-free survival rates. This data undermines the growing evidence of limited PC-RPLND being justifiable in strictly unilateral residual mass <5 cm. This data has to be confirmed with a longer follow-up regarding in-field and retroperitoneal recurrences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6345078
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63450782019-01-31 Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection Hiester, Andreas Nini, Alessandro Fingerhut, Anna große Siemer, Robert Winter, Christian Albers, Peter Lusch, Achim Front Surg Surgery Background: Post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) plays a crucial role in treatment of metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer. Objective: To evaluate the functional outcome regarding the preservation of ejaculatory function comparing a bilateral vs. unilateral template resection in PC-RPLND patients. In addition, oncological safety and perioperative complications of the unilateral template resection was compared to the full bilateral one. Design/Setting/Participants: Between 2003 and 2018, 504 RPLNDs have been performed in 434 patients. The database of consecutive patients was queried to identify 171 patients with PC-RPLND after 1st line chemotherapy for a non-seminoma with or without bilateral template resection. Re-Do's, late relapse, salvage patients, and thoraco-abdominal approaches were excluded. Indication for a template resection was a unilateral residual mass mainly <5 cm as published (1). Outcome, Measurement, and Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistics were used to report preoperative features, postoperative outcomes and patterns of recurrence, on the overall population and after stratification for the type of resection (bilateral vs. unilateral). Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to describe recurrence- and cancer-specific mortality-free survival rates at different time points. Results and Limitations: Overall, 90 and 81 patients underwent unilateral and bilateral radical resection, respectively. Median size of residual mass was 7 cm for bilateral and 4 cm for unilateral template resection. Clinical stage II and III were present in 31 and 69% of patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 14.5 months (IQR 3.3–37.6). The 1- and 2-year recurrence-free survival rates were 91 and 91%, and 77 and 72% for patients treated with unilateral template and bilateral resection, respectively (p = 0.0078). Median time to recurrence was 9.5 and 9 months in template and bilateral resection group, respectively. Adjunctive procedures were performed in 56 patients (33%) and were significantly more frequent in the bilateral resection group (43 vs. 23%, p = 0.006). The overall high-grade complication rate (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) was 6, 3, and 9% in unilateral template and bilateral resection group, respectively (p = 0.6). The rate of preservation of antegrade ejaculation was significantly higher in the unilateral group. Conclusions: Antegrade ejaculation in patients undergoing unilateral template resection with a residual mass <5 cm can be preserved at a much higher rate. Moreover, this surgical procedure is oncologically safe in terms of mid-term recurrence and CSM-free survival rates. This data undermines the growing evidence of limited PC-RPLND being justifiable in strictly unilateral residual mass <5 cm. This data has to be confirmed with a longer follow-up regarding in-field and retroperitoneal recurrences. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6345078/ /pubmed/30705885 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00080 Text en Copyright © 2019 Hiester, Nini, Fingerhut, große Siemer, Winter, Albers and Lusch. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Hiester, Andreas
Nini, Alessandro
Fingerhut, Anna
große Siemer, Robert
Winter, Christian
Albers, Peter
Lusch, Achim
Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title_full Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title_fullStr Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title_full_unstemmed Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title_short Preservation of Ejaculatory Function After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection (PC-RPLND) in Patients With Testicular Cancer: Template vs. Bilateral Resection
title_sort preservation of ejaculatory function after postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (pc-rplnd) in patients with testicular cancer: template vs. bilateral resection
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6345078/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705885
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00080
work_keys_str_mv AT hiesterandreas preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT ninialessandro preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT fingerhutanna preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT großesiemerrobert preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT winterchristian preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT alberspeter preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection
AT luschachim preservationofejaculatoryfunctionafterpostchemotherapyretroperitoneallymphnodedissectionpcrplndinpatientswithtesticularcancertemplatevsbilateralresection