Literature DB >> 19409120

Uni- vs. multiloculated pelvic lymphoceles: differences in the treatment of symptomatic pelvic lymphoceles after open radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Adrian Treiyer1, Bjorn Haben, Eberhard Stark, Peter Breitling, Joachim Steffens.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the treatment of symptomatic pelvic lymphoceles (SPL) after performing radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) and pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLA) simultaneously.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed, in a retrospective study, 250 patients who underwent RRP with PLA simultaneously. Only patients with SPL were treated using different non- and invasive procedures such as percutaneous aspiration, percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) with or without sclerotherapy, laparoscopic lymphocelectomy (LL) and open marsupialization (OM).
RESULTS: Fifty-two patients (21%) had postoperative subclinical pelvic lymphoceles. Thirty patients (12%) developed SPL. Fifteen patients with noninfected uniloculated lymphocele (NUL) healed spontaneously after performing PCD. The remaining seven patients required sclerotherapy with additional doxycycline. After performing PCD, NUL healed better and faster than noninfected multiloculated lymphocele (NML) (success rate: 80% vs. 16%, respectively). Twenty-seven percent of patients treated initially with PCD, with or without sclerotherapy had persistent lymphocele. All patients were successfully treated with LL. Only one patient had an abscess as a major complication of a persistent SPL after PCD and sclerotherapy and was treated via an open laparotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic NUL can be treated using PCD with or without sclerotherapy. If this therapy fails as first-line treatment, laparoscopic lymphocelectomy should be considered within a short period of time in order to achieve successful treatment. NML should be treated using a laparoscopic approach in centers where this type of expertise is available. Infected lymphoceles are drained externally. In these cases, percutaneous or open external drainage with adequate antibiotic coverage is preferable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19409120     DOI: 10.1590/s1677-55382009000200006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Braz J Urol        ISSN: 1677-5538            Impact factor:   1.541


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Lymphoceles after radical retropubic prostatectomy. A treatment algorithm].

Authors:  P Anheuser; A Treiyer; E Stark; B Haben; J A Steffens
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Reducing morbidity of pelvic and retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  Mark W Ball; Michael A Gorin; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Large Bilateral Symptomatic Pelvic Lymphoceles Following a Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Philips G Michael; Rakesh Jamkhandikar; Girish L Kukade; Said K S Al-Aghbari
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2016-11-30

4.  The deep vein thrombosis caused by lymphocele after endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.

Authors:  Seung Chol Park; Jea Whan Lee; Soon-A Park; Young Hwan Lee; Byung-Jun So; Joung Sik Rim
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 5.  How to minimize lymphoceles and treat clinically symptomatic lymphoceles after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Hak J Lee; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 6.  Complications of pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer.

Authors:  K A Keegan; M S Cookson
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.092

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.