Gregoire Schneider1, Said Ourfali1,2, Olivier Rouviere3,2, Gaele Pagnoux3, Marc Colombel1,2. 1. Urologic Surgery and Transplantation Department Hôpital Edouard Herriot Hospices Civils de Lyon Lyon France. 2. Université Lyon 1 Faculté de Médecine Lyon Est Université de Lyon Lyon France. 3. Department of Uroradiology Hôpital Edouard Herriot Hospices Civils de Lyon Lyon France.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pelvic lymphocele is the most common complication of pelvic lymph node dissection after radical prostatectomy. Management of symptomatic pelvic lymphocele begins with percutaneous drainage, followed by sclerotherapy or surgical marsupialization and more recently, lymphatic embolization. In this article, we show the feasibility and results of two lymphatic embolization after prostatectomy with lymph node dissection. CASE PRESENTATION: We decided to perform lymphatic embolization in two patients with persistent symptomatic pelvic lymphocele, after percutaneous drainage. This was done through inguinal lymph node puncture using Lipiodol and N-butyl cyanoacrylate glue injection. Drainage removal was done on the day after the procedure and clinical recovery was maintained at follow-up visits, 3 and 4 months later, in both patients. Computed tomography at 6 and 10 weeks after embolization showed the disappearance of the lymphocele. CONCLUSION: Our two case reports support the promising results of lymphatic embolization in this pathology.
INTRODUCTION: Pelvic lymphocele is the most common complication of pelvic lymph node dissection after radical prostatectomy. Management of symptomatic pelvic lymphocele begins with percutaneous drainage, followed by sclerotherapy or surgical marsupialization and more recently, lymphatic embolization. In this article, we show the feasibility and results of two lymphatic embolization after prostatectomy with lymph node dissection. CASE PRESENTATION: We decided to perform lymphatic embolization in two patients with persistent symptomatic pelvic lymphocele, after percutaneous drainage. This was done through inguinal lymph node puncture using Lipiodol and N-butyl cyanoacrylate glue injection. Drainage removal was done on the day after the procedure and clinical recovery was maintained at follow-up visits, 3 and 4 months later, in both patients. Computed tomography at 6 and 10 weeks after embolization showed the disappearance of the lymphocele. CONCLUSION: Our two case reports support the promising results of lymphatic embolization in this pathology.
Authors: Wael Y Khoder; Armin J Becker; Michael Seitz; Nikolas Haseke; Boris Schlenker; Christian G Stief Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2011-03-05 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Nicola Fossati; Peter-Paul M Willemse; Thomas Van den Broeck; Roderick C N van den Bergh; Cathy Yuhong Yuan; Erik Briers; Joaquim Bellmunt; Michel Bolla; Philip Cornford; Maria De Santis; Ekelechi MacPepple; Ann M Henry; Malcolm D Mason; Vsevolod B Matveev; Henk G van der Poel; Theo H van der Kwast; Olivier Rouvière; Ivo G Schoots; Thomas Wiegel; Thomas B Lam; Nicolas Mottet; Steven Joniau Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: William Alago; Ajita Deodhar; Hans Michell; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Anne M Covey; Stephen B Solomon; George I Getrajdman; Guido Dalbagni; Karen T Brown Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2012-04-07 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Hannah Hill; Ravi N Srinivasa; Joseph J Gemmete; Anthony Hage; Jacob Bundy; Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick Journal: J Endourol Case Rep Date: 2018-05-01