OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in endometrial cancer with lymphatic dissemination, emphasizing the examination of para-aortic metastases relative to the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). METHODS: Over 36 months, 422 consecutive patients were managed by predefined surgical guidelines differentiating low-risk patients from patients at risk for dissemination requiring systematic lymphadenectomy. Low risk was defined as grade 1 or 2 endometrioid type with myometrial invasion (MI) < or = 50% and primary tumor diameter (PTD) < or = 2 cm. Pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes were submitted separately, with nodes identified from all 8 pelvic and 4 para-aortic node-bearing basins. Surgical quality assessments examined median node counts (primary surrogate for quality) and nodes harvested above and below the IMA and excised gonadal veins (secondary surrogates). RESULTS: Lymphadenectomy was not required in 27% of patients (all low risk) and in 33% (n=112) of endometrioid cases. However, 22 patients (20%) of this latter cohort had lymphadenectomy and all lymph nodes were negative. Sixty-three (22%) of 281 patients undergoing lymphadenectomy had lymph node metastases: both pelvic and para-aortic in 51%, only pelvic in 33%, and isolated to the para-aortic area in 16%. Therefore, 67% of patients with lymphatic dissemination had para-aortic lymph node metastases. Furthermore, 77% of patients with para-aortic node involvement had metastases above the IMA, whereas nodes in the ipsilateral para-aortic area below the IMA and ipsilateral common iliac basin were declared negative in 60% and 71%, respectively. Gonadal veins were excised in 25 patients with para-aortic node metastases; 7 patients (28%) had documented metastatic involvement of gonadal veins or surrounding soft tissue. CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of lymphatic metastasis above the IMA indicates the need for systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (vs sampling) up to the renal vessels. The latter should include consideration of excision of the gonadal veins. Conversely, lymphadenectomy does not benefit patients with grade 1 and 2 endometrioid lesions with MI < or = 50% and PTD < or = 2 cm.
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in endometrial cancer with lymphatic dissemination, emphasizing the examination of para-aortic metastases relative to the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). METHODS: Over 36 months, 422 consecutive patients were managed by predefined surgical guidelines differentiating low-risk patients from patients at risk for dissemination requiring systematic lymphadenectomy. Low risk was defined as grade 1 or 2 endometrioid type with myometrial invasion (MI) < or = 50% and primary tumor diameter (PTD) < or = 2 cm. Pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes were submitted separately, with nodes identified from all 8 pelvic and 4 para-aortic node-bearing basins. Surgical quality assessments examined median node counts (primary surrogate for quality) and nodes harvested above and below the IMA and excised gonadal veins (secondary surrogates). RESULTS: Lymphadenectomy was not required in 27% of patients (all low risk) and in 33% (n=112) of endometrioid cases. However, 22 patients (20%) of this latter cohort had lymphadenectomy and all lymph nodes were negative. Sixty-three (22%) of 281 patients undergoing lymphadenectomy had lymph node metastases: both pelvic and para-aortic in 51%, only pelvic in 33%, and isolated to the para-aortic area in 16%. Therefore, 67% of patients with lymphatic dissemination had para-aortic lymph node metastases. Furthermore, 77% of patients with para-aortic node involvement had metastases above the IMA, whereas nodes in the ipsilateral para-aortic area below the IMA and ipsilateral common iliac basin were declared negative in 60% and 71%, respectively. Gonadal veins were excised in 25 patients with para-aortic node metastases; 7 patients (28%) had documented metastatic involvement of gonadal veins or surrounding soft tissue. CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of lymphatic metastasis above the IMA indicates the need for systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy (vs sampling) up to the renal vessels. The latter should include consideration of excision of the gonadal veins. Conversely, lymphadenectomy does not benefit patients with grade 1 and 2 endometrioid lesions with MI < or = 50% and PTD < or = 2 cm.
Authors: C L Creutzberg; W L van Putten; P C Koper; M L Lybeert; J J Jobsen; C C Wárlám-Rodenhuis; K A De Winter; L C Lutgens; A C van den Bergh; E van de Steen-Banasik; H Beerman; M van Lent Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-04-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Taylor Murray; Jiaquan Xu; Michael J Thun Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Kimberly K Leslie; Kristina W Thiel; Michael J Goodheart; Koen De Geest; Yichen Jia; Shujie Yang Journal: Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 2.844
Authors: Michael R Milam; James Java; Joan L Walker; Daniel S Metzinger; Lynn P Parker; Robert L Coleman Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Jvan Casarin; Francesco Multinu; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; David Cibula; William A Cliby; Fabio Ghezzi; Mario Leitao; Ikuo Konishi; Joo-Hyun Nam; Denis Querleu; Pamela T Soliman; Kathleen J Yost; Amy L Weaver; Andrea Mariani; Gretchen E Glaser Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; Andrea Mariani; Sean C Dowdy; Amy L Weaver; Michaela E McGree; Janice R Martin; Gary L Keeney; Aminah Jatoi; Bobbie S Gostout; Karl C Podratz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Robert W Holloway; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Floor J Backes; John F Boggess; Walter H Gotlieb; W Jeffrey Lowery; Emma C Rossi; Edward J Tanner; Rebecca J Wolsky Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-05-28 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Christine H Kim; Fady Khoury-Collado; Emma L Barber; Robert A Soslow; Vicky Makker; Mario M Leitao; Yukio Sonoda; Kaled M Alektiar; Richard R Barakat; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-10-04 Impact factor: 5.482