OBJECTIVE: Treatment decisions regarding the use of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for low-stage and advanced testicular cancer may be influenced by the morbidity of the procedure. We sought to compare the complication profile of primary (P-) and post-chemotherapy (PC-) RPLND using a standardized complication grading scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 112 and 96 patients who underwent P-RPLND and PC-RPLND, respectively, between 1982 and 2007 for perioperative outcomes and late complications. Postoperative complications were graded using a 5-tiered scale based on the severity and/or level of intervention required for resolution. RESULTS: P-RPLND patients had rates of 5%, 24%, and 7% for intraoperative, postoperative, and late complications, respectively. For PC-RPLND, these rates were 12%, 32%, and 7%, respectively (P = 0.11, 0.19, and 1, respectively). Major postoperative complications (grades III-V) were observed in 3 (3%) P-RPLND and 8 (8%) PC-RPLND patients (P = 0.15), including 1 fatal pulmonary embolus in a PC-RPLND patient. Ileus accounted for 63% and 45% of postoperative complications of P-RPLND and PC-RPLND, respectively. PC-RPLND was associated with significantly greater operative times, blood loss, and transfusion rates (P < 0.001). Compared with PC-RPLND after first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSGCT, there were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes for PC-RPLND performed in other settings. CONCLUSIONS: P-RPLND and PC-RPLND are associated with low rates of serious short- and long-term complications and negligible mortality, without significant differences between the 2 procedures. The safe morbidity profile of RPLND performed by fellowship-trained urologic oncologists should be considered during treatment decision-making for low-stage and advanced testicular cancer. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: Treatment decisions regarding the use of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for low-stage and advanced testicular cancer may be influenced by the morbidity of the procedure. We sought to compare the complication profile of primary (P-) and post-chemotherapy (PC-) RPLND using a standardized complication grading scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 112 and 96 patients who underwent P-RPLND and PC-RPLND, respectively, between 1982 and 2007 for perioperative outcomes and late complications. Postoperative complications were graded using a 5-tiered scale based on the severity and/or level of intervention required for resolution. RESULTS: P-RPLND patients had rates of 5%, 24%, and 7% for intraoperative, postoperative, and late complications, respectively. For PC-RPLND, these rates were 12%, 32%, and 7%, respectively (P = 0.11, 0.19, and 1, respectively). Major postoperative complications (grades III-V) were observed in 3 (3%) P-RPLND and 8 (8%) PC-RPLND patients (P = 0.15), including 1 fatal pulmonary embolus in a PC-RPLND patient. Ileus accounted for 63% and 45% of postoperative complications of P-RPLND and PC-RPLND, respectively. PC-RPLND was associated with significantly greater operative times, blood loss, and transfusion rates (P < 0.001). Compared with PC-RPLND after first-line chemotherapy for advanced NSGCT, there were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes for PC-RPLND performed in other settings. CONCLUSIONS: P-RPLND and PC-RPLND are associated with low rates of serious short- and long-term complications and negligible mortality, without significant differences between the 2 procedures. The safe morbidity profile of RPLND performed by fellowship-trained urologic oncologists should be considered during treatment decision-making for low-stage and advanced testicular cancer. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Shilajit D Kundu; Darren R Feldman; Brett S Carver; Amit Gupta; George J Bosl; Robert J Motzer; Dean F Bajorin; Joel Sheinfeld Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-08-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Salim K Cheriyan; Marilin Nicholson; Ahmet M Aydin; Mounsif Azizi; Charles C Peyton; Wade J Sexton; Scott M Gilbert Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2020-01
Authors: C Overs; J B Beauval; L Mourey; P Rischmann; M Soulié; M Roumiguié; Nicolas Doumerc Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-01-20 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Nicholas R Rocco; Sean P Stroup; Haidar M Abdul-Muhsin; Michael T Marshall; Michael G Santomauro; Matthew S Christman; James O L'Esperance; Erik P Castle Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 4.226