D K Osmonov1, A V Aksenov2, C A Jilg3, W Schultze-Seeman3, C M Naumann1, M F Hamann1, K Bothe1, K-P Jünemann1. 1. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller Straße 3, Haus 18, 24105, Kiel, Deutschland. 2. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller Straße 3, Haus 18, 24105, Kiel, Deutschland. alexey.aksenov@uksh.de. 3. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinik Freiburg, Freiburg, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Salvage extended pelvic lymph node dissection (salvage ePLND) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) biochemical recurrence is an alternative to the commonly used androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or chemotherapy. Small patient number, insufficient accuracy of contemporary imaging methods for lymph node relapse diagnostics, and the lack of prospective data present limiting factors for a wider application of salvage ePLND. The purpose of this publication is to review German and European data and studies on the subject of salvage ePLND and to discuss future perspectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed available studies up to October 2014 from Medline with the keywords "salvage lymph node dissection prostate cancer". RESULTS: A total of 51 publications since 1984 (up to October 2014) meeting the search criteria were found. Ten of these were studies that analyzed the results of salvage ePLND. Of these 10 studies, 6 originated from German clinics. Furthermore, among these 51 publications, there were 2 clinical case reports (1 from Germany) and 3 reviews (none from Germany). CONCLUSIONS: The available data show insufficient evidence-based validity. There have been no prospective studies and just one multicenter study. However, single-center retrospective studies have shown promising results. Salvage ePLND leads to biochemical remission, freedom from clinical recurrence, and probably also to renewed response to ADT in patients with castration-resistant PCa. Multicenter prospective studies should be conducted in Germany (where most of the available studies have been performed). The selection of patients should be analyzed in order to identify clear selection criteria for salvage ePLND.
BACKGROUND: Salvage extended pelvic lymph node dissection (salvage ePLND) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) biochemical recurrence is an alternative to the commonly used androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or chemotherapy. Small patient number, insufficient accuracy of contemporary imaging methods for lymph node relapse diagnostics, and the lack of prospective data present limiting factors for a wider application of salvage ePLND. The purpose of this publication is to review German and European data and studies on the subject of salvage ePLND and to discuss future perspectives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed available studies up to October 2014 from Medline with the keywords "salvage lymph node dissection prostate cancer". RESULTS: A total of 51 publications since 1984 (up to October 2014) meeting the search criteria were found. Ten of these were studies that analyzed the results of salvage ePLND. Of these 10 studies, 6 originated from German clinics. Furthermore, among these 51 publications, there were 2 clinical case reports (1 from Germany) and 3 reviews (none from Germany). CONCLUSIONS: The available data show insufficient evidence-based validity. There have been no prospective studies and just one multicenter study. However, single-center retrospective studies have shown promising results. Salvage ePLND leads to biochemical remission, freedom from clinical recurrence, and probably also to renewed response to ADT in patients with castration-resistant PCa. Multicenter prospective studies should be conducted in Germany (where most of the available studies have been performed). The selection of patients should be analyzed in order to identify clear selection criteria for salvage ePLND.
Authors: Ludwig Rinnab; Joerg Simon; Richard E Hautmann; M V Cronauer; Kathrin Hohl; Andreas K Buck; Sven N Reske; Felix M Mottaghy Journal: World J Urol Date: 2009-02-21 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: G Gandaglia; Q-D Trinh; J C Hu; J Schiffmann; A Becker; F Roghmann; I Popa; Z Tian; P Perrotte; F Montorsi; A Briganti; P I Karakiewicz; M Sun; F Abdollah Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-01-02 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Firas Abdollah; Maxine Sun; Rodolphe Thuret; Lars Budäus; Claudio Jeldres; Markus Graefen; Alberto Briganti; Paul Perrotte; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: C A Jilg; H C Rischke; S N Reske; K Henne; A-L Grosu; W Weber; V Drendel; M Schwardt; A Jandausch; W Schultze-Seemann Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-10-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Tobias Maurer; Gregor Weirich; Margret Schottelius; Martina Weineisen; Benjamin Frisch; Asli Okur; Hubert Kübler; Mark Thalgott; Nassir Navab; Markus Schwaiger; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Jürgen E Gschwend; Matthias Eiber Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Daniar K Osmonov; Alexey V Aksenov; David Trick; Carsten M Naumann; Moritz F Hamann; Amr Abou Faddan; Klaus-Peter Jünemann Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 2.264