Assessment of required nodal yield in a high risk cohort undergoing extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and its impact on functional outcomes

BJU International

Volumn 111, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 85-94

  Sagalovich, Daniel ^a   Calaway, Adam ^a   Srivastava, Abhishek ^a   Sooriakumaran, Prasanna ^a   Tewari, Ashutosh K ^a  

^a NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

erectile function; functional outcomes; high risk; lymph node yield; lymphadenectomy; potency; prostatectomy; robotic

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CANCER STAGING; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLEASON SCORE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPHORRHEA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PELVIS LYMPHADENECTOMY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATECTOMY; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS;

EID: 84871608065     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11351.x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Herr HW, Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Donat SM, Reuter VE, Bajorin DF. Impact of the number of lymph nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 2002; 167: 1295-1298
2. Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol 2002; 168: 514-518
3. Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N et al. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 118-125
4. Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 2002; 167: 1681-1686
5. Briganti A, Blute ML, Eastham JH et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1251-1265
6. Nishizawa Y, Ito M, Saito N, Suzuki T, Sugito M, Tanaka T. Male sexual dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011; 26: 1541-1548
7. Akasu T, Sugihara K, Moriya Y. Male urinary and sexual functions after mesorectal excision alone or in combination with extended lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16: 2779-2786
8. D-Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998; 280: 969-974.
9. Tewari AK, Srivastava A, Huang MW et al. Anatomical grades of nerve sparing: a risk-stratified approach to neural-hammock sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int 2011; 108: 984-992.
10. Capitanio U, Pellucchi F, Gallina A et al. How can we predict lymphorrhoea and clinically significant lymphocoeles after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy? Clinical implications. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1095-1101.
11. Dev H, Rickman D, Sooriakumaran P et al. Biobanking after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a quality assessment of providing prostate tissue for RNA studies. J Transl Med 2011; 9: 121.
12. Godoy G, Chong KT, Cronin A et al. Extent of pelvic lymph node dissection and the impact of standard template dissection on nomogram prediction of lymph node involvement. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 195-201.
13. Prasad SM, Keating NL, Wang Q et al. Variations in surgeon volume and use of pelvic lymph node dissection with open and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. Urology 2008; 72: 647-653.
14. Zorn KC, Katz MH, Bernstein A et al. Pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: assessing nodal yield, perioperative outcomes, and complications. Urology 2009; 74: 296-302.
15. Yee DS, Katz DJ, Godoy G et al. Extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical technique and initial experience. Urology 2010; 75: 1199-1204.
16. Weingartner K, Ramaswamy A, Bittinger A, Gerharz EW, Voge D, Riedmiller H. Anatomical basis for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: results of an autopsy study and implications for the clinic. J Urol 1996; 156: 1969-1971.
17. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A et al. Critical assessment of ideal nodal yield at pelvic lymphadenectomy to accurately diagnose prostate cancer nodal metastasis in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2007; 69: 147-151.
18. Solberg A, Angelsen A, Bergan U, Haugen OA, Viset T, Klepp O. Frequency of lymphoceles after open and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2003; 37: 218-221.
19. Allaf ME, Palapattu GS, Trock BJ, Carter HB, Walsh PC. Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2004; 172: 1840-1844.
20. Heidenreich A, Ohlmann CH, Polyakov S. Anatomical extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 29-37.
21. Tewari AK, Grover S, Sooriakumaran P et al. Nerve sparing can preserve orgasmic function in most men after robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2012; 109: 596-602.
22. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A et al. Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2006; 50: 1006-1013.