Literature DB >> 12137839

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: description of the nerve-sparing technique.

Reinhard Peschel1, Matthew T Gettman, Richard Neururer, Alfred Hobisch, Georg Bartsch.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is associated with a more favorable postoperative recovery and decreased morbidity compared with open RPLND. To date, laparoscopic RPLND is used as a diagnostic tool for patients with clinical Stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumor and as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool for patients with low-volume Stage II nonseminomatous germ cell tumor after chemotherapy. In an effort to further expand the therapeutic implications for laparoscopic RPLND, we describe a nerve-sparing technique for laparoscopic RPLND. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS: In all cases, a four-port transperitoneal approach was used to perform a unilateral nerve-sparing technique. Laparoscopic nerve-sparing RPLND requires complete exposure of the retroperitoneum, similar to the standard procedure. A stepwise surgical approach is required for prospective identification of the sympathetic trunk and postganglionic nerve fibers. Identification and division of the lumbar veins is required for complete mobilization of the vena cava to facilitate dissection of the postganglionic nerves on the right side as they course dorsal to the vena cava. Meticulous dissection was required for preservation of the postganglionic nerves in the interaortocaval and para-aortic regions.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic nerve-sparing RPLND is technically feasible. Performance of laparoscopic nerve-sparing RPLND decreases the potential morbidity associated with the standard laparoscopic technique further and may help expand the therapeutic potential for this minimally invasive procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12137839     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(02)01827-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  9 in total

1.  [Post-chemotherapy laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in low volume residual germ cell cancer: a technique to reduce morbidity].

Authors:  S Aufderklamm; T Todenhöfer; J Hennenlotter; G Gakis; J Mischinger; J Mundhenk; M Germann; A Stenzl; C Schwentner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  [Complex residual tumors after chemotherapy of nonseminomatous germ cell tumors. Laparoscopic management - limits and chances].

Authors:  S Aufderklamm; T Todenhöfer; J Hennenlotter; J Mischinger; A Sim; J Böttge; S Rausch; S Bier; O Halalsheh; A Stenzl; G Gakis; C Schwentner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Surgical removal of retroperitoneal tumors after chemotherapy treated testicular tumors.

Authors:  Allen Sim; Stefan Aufderklamm; Omar Halalsheh; Tilman Todenhöfer; Christian Schwentner
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 4.  Robotic Primary RPLND for Stage I Testicular Cancer: a Review of Indications and Outcomes.

Authors:  Heather J Chalfin; Wesley Ludwig; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Management of patients with low-stage nonseminomatous germ cell testicular cancer.

Authors:  Andrew J Stephenson; Joel Sheinfeld
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2005-09

6.  Surgery for retroperitoneal relapse in the setting of a prior retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for germ cell tumor.

Authors:  Geoffrey T Gotto; Brett S Carver; Pramod Sogani; Joel Sheinfeld
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2010 Jan-Mar

Review 7.  [Value of retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for germ cell cancer].

Authors:  S Krege
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 8.  Laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for nonseminomatous testicular carcinoma.

Authors:  Stefan Corvin; Markus Kuczyk; Aristotelis Anastasiadis; Arnulf Stenzl
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-03-19       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  Concise review: fertility preservation: an update.

Authors:  Clara González; Montserrat Boada; Marta Devesa; Anna Veiga
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 6.940

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.