Literature DB >> 29705969

The impact of complete embedding of remaining tissue in gynecological lymph node dissection specimen in surgical pathology on lymph node yield: is it clinically relevant?

Julia Andruszkow1, Ivo Meinhold-Heerlein2, Brigitte Winkler2, Benjamin Bruno3, Ruth Knüchel1, Jörg Jäkel4,5.   

Abstract

The assessment of nodal metastases in gynecological surgical specimen is an important staging parameter, directing further therapeutic procedures. Since the number of lymph nodes (LNs) removed is seen as an indicator of surgical and pathological quality, the demand for higher lymph node (LN) counts is raising. The goal of this prospective study was the comparison between lymph node counts of macroscopically detectable LNs and the LN yield by complete embedding and proceeding of all submitted LN-containing tissue in the pathology laboratory. One hundred six cases of cervical, uterine, or ovarian cancer, treated in three different hospitals within 3 years, were analyzed. All tissue submitted to the pathology from the surgically performed LN dissections was completely dissected and embedded in the institute of pathology. Subsequently, the amount of LN of all macroscopically detectable nodes was compared to the final histologically reached numbers of LN. Furthermore the histologically visible area of the LNs and their metastases was analyzed to assess the relation of LN numbers to the whole examined LN area. Complete embedding raises the average number of LN counted by 3 to 7 but did only minimally increase the LN area for microscopical examination by about 5% due to the small area of the additional LNs in the remaining fat tissue. The staging was in no case altered by complete embedding, even when additional nodal metastases were detected in the remaining fat tissue, since this was only seen in cases which had already metastatic nodes. Complete embedding of LN-containing tissue did not provide relevant additional staging information and seems therefore unnecessarily laborious, careful pathological work-up assumed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Gynecology; Lymph nodes; Metastases

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29705969     DOI: 10.1007/s00428-018-2363-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  26 in total

1.  Implication of the examining pathologist to meet the oncologic standard of lymph node count after laparoscopic lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  Malgorzata Lanowska; Jekaterina Vasiljeva; Vito Chiantera; Simone Marnitz; Achim Schneider; Birgit Rudolph; Christhardt Köhler
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 2.935

2.  Determinants of lymph node count in endometrial cancer surgical staging.

Authors:  Beatrice Cormier; Philippe Sauthier; Christian Lussier; Geng Zang; Marie-Helene Mayrand
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.437

3.  Defining the optimal lymphadenectomy cut-off value in epithelial ovarian cancer staging surgery utilizing a mathematical model of validation.

Authors:  A Pereira; N Irishina; T Pérez-Medina; J F Magrina; P M Magtibay; A Kovaleva; A Rodríguez-Tapia; E Iglesias
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 4.424

4.  Lymph node counts in endometrial cancer: expectations versus reality.

Authors:  Elizabeth D Euscher; Roland Bassett; Anais Malpica
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 6.394

5.  Clinical comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open hysterectomy procedures for endometrial cancer patients.

Authors:  Lynette Johnson; W Douglas Bunn; Loan Nguyen; Jessica Rice; Minakshi Raj; Mary J Cunningham
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-11-03

Review 6.  Hysterectomy with radiotherapy or chemotherapy or both for women with locally advanced cervical cancer.

Authors:  Fani Kokka; Andrew Bryant; Elly Brockbank; Melanie Powell; David Oram
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-04-07

7.  Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.

Authors:  Maria C Bell; Jenny Torgerson; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden; Allison Wierda Suttle; Sharon Hunt
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Lymph node counts in uterine cancer: a randomized double blind trial.

Authors:  Joseph T Santoso; Ali Azadi; Jim Wan; Charles Handorf; Robert L Coleman; Todd D Tillmanns
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 9.  Laparoscopic para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy: experience with 150 patients and review of the literature.

Authors:  M Possover; N Krause; K Plaul; R Kühne-Heid; A Schneider
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 5.482

10.  Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging.

Authors:  Andrea Mariani; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Bobbie S Gostout; Monica B Jones; Timothy O Wilson; Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 5.482

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.