OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a minimum number of lymph nodes (LNs) exist to detect lymph node invasion (LNI) in patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: The study included 551 consecutive patients, from 13 centers worldwide, who underwent RNU and lymphadenectomy (LND) between 1992 and 2006. LND was performed at the discretion of the surgeon. All pathological slides were re-reviewed by uropathologists according to strict criteria. Receiver-operating characteristic curve coordinates were used to determine the probability of diagnosing LNI according to the total number of nodes removed. Additionally, the relationship between the number of nodes removed and the rate of positive LNs was tested in univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Median patient age was 68 years (range: 27-97). Of 551 patients, 140 (25.4%) had positive lymph nodes. Median number of lymph nodes removed was 5 (mean 6.7, range 1-41). The Receiver-operating characteristic coordinates plot indicated that the removal of 13 nodes yielded a 90% probability to detect >or=1 positive LNs. The removal of 8 nodes resulted in a 75% probability of finding >or=1 positive nodes. Removal of >8 LNs (P = .03; odds ratio 1.49) was independently associated with LNI after adjusting for pathological stage and grade. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that 8 LNs need to be removed at radical nephroureterectomy to achieve a 75% probability of finding >or=1 positive nodes. Further improvement of the specificity of LND will require the removal of more lymph nodes.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a minimum number of lymph nodes (LNs) exist to detect lymph node invasion (LNI) in patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: The study included 551 consecutive patients, from 13 centers worldwide, who underwent RNU and lymphadenectomy (LND) between 1992 and 2006. LND was performed at the discretion of the surgeon. All pathological slides were re-reviewed by uropathologists according to strict criteria. Receiver-operating characteristic curve coordinates were used to determine the probability of diagnosing LNI according to the total number of nodes removed. Additionally, the relationship between the number of nodes removed and the rate of positive LNs was tested in univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Median patient age was 68 years (range: 27-97). Of 551 patients, 140 (25.4%) had positive lymph nodes. Median number of lymph nodes removed was 5 (mean 6.7, range 1-41). The Receiver-operating characteristic coordinates plot indicated that the removal of 13 nodes yielded a 90% probability to detect >or=1 positive LNs. The removal of 8 nodes resulted in a 75% probability of finding >or=1 positive nodes. Removal of >8 LNs (P = .03; odds ratio 1.49) was independently associated with LNI after adjusting for pathological stage and grade. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that 8 LNs need to be removed at radical nephroureterectomy to achieve a 75% probability of finding >or=1 positive nodes. Further improvement of the specificity of LND will require the removal of more lymph nodes.
Authors: Pierre Colin; Tarek P Ghoneim; Laurent Nison; Thomas Seisen; Eric Lechevallier; Xavier Cathelineau; Adil Ouzzane; Marc Zerbib; Jean-Alexandre Long; Alain Ruffion; Sébastien Crouzet; Olivier Cussenot; Marie Audouin; Jacques Irani; Solène Gardic; Pascal Gres; François Audenet; Mathieu Roumiguié; Antoine Valeri; Morgan Rouprêt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-06-29 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Maximilian Burger; Shahrokh F Shariat; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Juan Ignacio Martinez-Salamanca; Kazumasa Matsumoto; Thomas F Chromecki; Vincenzo Ficarra; Wassim Kassouf; Christian Seitz; Armin Pycha; Stefan Tritschler; Thomas J Walton; Giacomo Novara Journal: World J Urol Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Andrea B Apolo; Vanessa Hoffman; Matthew G Kaag; David M Latini; Cheryl T Lee; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Margaret Knowles; Dan Theodorescu; Bogdan A Czerniak; Jason A Efstathiou; Matthew L Albert; Srikala S Sridhar; Vitaly Margulis; Surena F Matin; Matthew D Galsky; Donna Hansel; Ashish M Kamat; Thomas W Flaig; Angela B Smith; Edward Messing; Diane Zipursky Quale; Yair Lotan Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-07-25 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Grégory Verhoest; Shahrokh F Shariat; Thomas F Chromecki; Jay D Raman; Vitaly Margulis; Giacomo Novara; Christian Seitz; Mesut Remzi; Morgan Rouprêt; Douglas S Scherr; Karim Bensalah Journal: World J Urol Date: 2011-06-17 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Mario Alvarez-Maestro; Juan Gómez Rivas; Sergio Alonso Y Gregorio; Cristina de Castro Guerin; Ángel Tabernero Gómez; Jesús Cisneros Ledo Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2016-11-30
Authors: Adil Ouzzane; Pierre Colin; Tarek P Ghoneim; Marc Zerbib; Alexandre De La Taille; François Audenet; Fabien Saint; Nicolas Hoarau; Emilie Adam; Marie Dominique Azemar; Henri Bensadoun; Luc Cormier; Olivier Cussenot; Alain Houlgatte; Gilles Karsenty; Charlotte Maurin; François Xavier Nouhaud; Véronique Phe; Thomas Polguer; Mathieu Roumiguié; Alain Ruffion; Morgan Rouprêt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2012-12-11 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Thomas Seisen; Shahrokh F Shariat; Olivier Cussenot; Benoit Peyronnet; Raphaële Renard-Penna; Pierre Colin; Morgan Rouprêt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 4.226