Literature DB >> 15247712

Complications of inguinal and pelvic lymphadenectomy for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: a contemporary series.

Bradford A Nelson1, Michael S Cookson, Joseph A Smith, Sam S Chang.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We examined complications in a contemporary population of patients with penile cancer undergoing inguinal lymphadenectomy with or without pelvic lymphadenectomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients treated for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis from January 1992 to May 2003 were reviewed. Complications and length of stay were examined. Complications were divided into early (30 days or less after surgery) and late (greater than 30 days).
RESULTS: A total of 41 men were diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma of the penis, of whom 22 underwent a total of 40 inguinal lymphadenectomies (ILs). Of the patients 13 underwent unilateral IL, 9 underwent simultaneous bilateral ILs and 10 underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy. Mean followup was 34.2 months (range 9.2 to 69.3). Early complications were lymphedema in 4 of 40 cases (10%), minor wound infection in 3 (7.5%) and minor wound separation in 3 (7.5%). Additionally, 5 of 40 patients (12.5%) had lymphoceles, which spontaneously resolved. Late complications were lymphedema in 2 of 40 patients (5%), flap necrosis in 1 (2.5%) and lymphocele in 1 (2.5%), requiring percutaneous drainage. There was no significant difference in the complication rates in patients with unilateral dissection compared to bilateral or pelvic lymph node dissection. Median length of stay was 2 days (range 1 to 9). There was no significant difference in hospital stay for unilateral dissection compared to bilateral or pelvic lymph node dissection.
CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate the relative safety of a contemporary lymphadenectomy. We believe that these results lend support to early lymphadenectomy, including simultaneous bilateral dissections, when clinically indicated. Furthermore, these results demonstrate the benefits of a standard postoperative pathway using compression stockings, sequential compression devices and early ambulation with restricted anticoagulant use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15247712     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000131453.52463.8f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  12 in total

1.  A case of local advanced penile cancer treated with multimodality therapy.

Authors:  Manabu Kato; Norihito Soga; Kiminobu Arima; Yoshiki Sugimura
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  [The significance of inguinal lymphadenectomy in carcinoma of the penis].

Authors:  E Preis; G Jakse
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL): Minimally Invasive Radical Inguinal Lymphadenectomy Technique.

Authors:  Rawal Sudhir; Raghunath S Krishnappa; Samir Khanna; R Sekon; Rakesh Koul
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-07-04

Review 4.  [Management of lymphatic fistulas in the groin from a surgeon's perspective].

Authors:  B Juntermanns; A E Cyrek; J Bernheim; J N Hoffmann
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Successful doxycycline treatment of lymphatic fistulas: report of five cases and review of the literature.

Authors:  Thilo Hackert; Jens Werner; Martin Loos; Markus W Büchler; Jürgen Weitz
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2006-05-09       Impact factor: 3.445

6.  Tensor fascia lata flap reconstruction following groin dissection: is it worthwhile?

Authors:  T J Nirmal; Ashish K Gupta; Santosh Kumar; Antony Devasia; Ninan Chacko; Nitin S Kekre
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  [The influence of the T stage on the risk of metastasis of penis cancer: T1 vs. T2].

Authors:  C M Naumann; C van der Horst; B Volkmer; F Kurtz; F J Martinéz Portillo; C Seif; S Hautmann; P M Braun; R Hautmann; K-P Jünemann
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  What next? Managing lymph nodes in men with penile cancer.

Authors:  Michael Leveridge; D Robert Siemens; Christopher Morash
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 9.  Contemporary inguinal lymph node dissection: minimizing complications.

Authors:  Philippe E Spiess; Mike S Hernandez; Curtis A Pettaway
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  Technical management of inguinal lymph-nodes in penile cancer: open versus minimal invasive.

Authors:  Andres Felipe Correa
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.