Alessandro Nini1,2,3, Matthias Boschheidgen4, Andreas Hiester5, Christian Winter5, Gerald Antoch4, Lars Schimmöller4, Peter Albers5. 1. Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, Saarland University Medical Center, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Saarland University, 66421, Homburg/Saar, Germany. alenini87@gmail.com. 2. Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, Department of Urology, URI, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Hospital, Milan, Italy. alenini87@gmail.com. 3. Department of Urology, Medical Faculty, University Hospital, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. alenini87@gmail.com. 4. Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. 5. Department of Urology, Medical Faculty, University Hospital, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the probability to correctly predict major vascular surgery (MVS) in patients undergoing postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) for testicular cancer. METHODS: From a database of 504 RPLNDs performed in 434 patients (2008-2018), 78 patients submitted to PC-RPLND for non-seminoma germ-cell cancer after cisplatin-based chemotherapy with available preoperative CT scans were identified. Second PC-PLNDs (Re-Dos), salvage RPLNDs, or RPLNDs for late-relapse were excluded as well as thoraco-abdominal approaches. Preoperative imaging was reviewed by a urologist and a radiologist blinded to operative details. RESULTS: Of 78 patients, 16 (20.5%) underwent MVS (caval and/or aortic replacement or reconstruction). On univariable analyses, transversal diameter, sagittal diameter, tumor volume, aorta- and cava-tumor contact angle, poor IGCCCG score, clinical stage III and preoperative positive markers were predictors of MVS (all p values ≤ 0.01). At multivariable analyses aorta- (cut-off 64°) and cava-tumor contact angle (cut-off 98°) and poor IGCCCG score represented the three most important predictors of MVS (all p values ≤ 0.05). The model constructed has a PPV 100%, NPV 87% and an accuracy of 88%. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of aorta-tumor contact angle ≥ 64°, cava-tumor contact angle ≥ 98° and poor IGCCCG score identify correctly 9 out of 10 patients requiring MVS at the time of first PC-RPLND.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the probability to correctly predict major vascular surgery (MVS) in patients undergoing postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) for testicular cancer. METHODS: From a database of 504 RPLNDs performed in 434 patients (2008-2018), 78 patients submitted to PC-RPLND for non-seminoma germ-cell cancer after cisplatin-based chemotherapy with available preoperative CT scans were identified. Second PC-PLNDs (Re-Dos), salvage RPLNDs, or RPLNDs for late-relapse were excluded as well as thoraco-abdominal approaches. Preoperative imaging was reviewed by a urologist and a radiologist blinded to operative details. RESULTS: Of 78 patients, 16 (20.5%) underwent MVS (caval and/or aortic replacement or reconstruction). On univariable analyses, transversal diameter, sagittal diameter, tumor volume, aorta- and cava-tumor contact angle, poor IGCCCG score, clinical stage III and preoperative positive markers were predictors of MVS (all p values ≤ 0.01). At multivariable analyses aorta- (cut-off 64°) and cava-tumor contact angle (cut-off 98°) and poor IGCCCG score represented the three most important predictors of MVS (all p values ≤ 0.05). The model constructed has a PPV 100%, NPV 87% and an accuracy of 88%. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of aorta-tumor contact angle ≥ 64°, cava-tumor contact angle ≥ 98° and poor IGCCCG score identify correctly 9 out of 10 patients requiring MVS at the time of first PC-RPLND.
Authors: K Fizazi; S Tjulandin; R Salvioni; J R Germà-Lluch; J Bouzy; D Ragan; C Bokemeyer; A Gerl; A Fléchon; J S de Bono; S Stenning; A Horwich; J Pont; P Albers; U De Giorgi; M Bower; A Bulanov; G Pizzocaro; J Aparicio; C R Nichols; C Théodore; J T Hartmann; H J Schmoll; S B Kaye; S Culine; J P Droz; C Mahé Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christian Winter; David Pfister; Jonas Busch; Cigdem Bingöl; Ulrich Ranft; Mark Schrader; Klaus-Peter Dieckmann; Axel Heidenreich; Peter Albers Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Scott C Johnson; Zachary L Smith; Charles Nottingham; Zeyad R Schwen; Stephen Thomas; Elliot K Fishman; Nam Ju Lee; Philip M Pierorazio; Scott E Eggener Journal: Urology Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: E P Fox; T D Weathers; S D Williams; P J Loehrer; T M Ulbright; J P Donohue; L H Einhorn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joost M Blok; Richard P Meijer; Henk G van der Poel; Axel Bex; Jeanette van Vooren; Japke J van Urk; Simon Horenblas; J L H Ruud Bosch Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Christian D Fankhauser; Luca Afferi; Sean P Stroup; Nicholas R Rocco; Kathleen Olson; Aditya Bagrodia; Fady Baky; Walter Cazzaniga; Erik Mayer; David Nicol; Ekrem Islamoglu; Stephane de Vergie; Ragheed Saoud; Scott E Eggener; Sebastiano Nazzani; Nicola Nicolai; Lee Hugar; Wade J Sexton; Deliu-Victor Matei; Ottavio De Cobelli; Joseph Cheaib; Phillip M Pierorazio; James Porter; Thomas Hermanns; Robert J Hamilton; Andreas Hiester; Peter Albers; Noel Clarke; Agostino Mattei Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 4.226