Accuracy of Laparoscopy in the Diagnosis and Staging of Lymphoproliferative Diseases

Laparoscopy seems to be playing an emerging role in the management of lymphoproliferative diseases. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze personal experience evaluating the role and limits of laparoscopy in the management of lymphomas. From July 1993 to December 2000, 131 consecutive patients were referred to our institution for primary diagnosis (group A, n = 70), suspected relapse (reassessment) (group B, n = 54), or staging/restaging of lymphoproliferative diseases (group C, n = 7). Diagnostic and/or operative laparoscopy was performed in all patients. To assess the accuracy of laparoscopy, the results were analyzed according to the indications for surgery. In all, 128 procedures were completed laparoscopically (95.5%). Conversion was required in 7 cases (5.1%). Causes of the conversions were severe obesity (body mass index 62.5), uncontrolled intraoperative bleeding (HIV+), nondiagnostic tissue sampling (2 cases), perisplenic inflammation and perisplenic abscesses (3 cases). The results of this study highlight the safety of diagnostic and staging laparoscopy and laparoscopic splenectomy in patients with lymphoproliferative diseases (major complications 2.9%, perioperative mortality 0%). In all, 96.4% of patients from group A and 100% of patients from group B were treated on the basis of laparoscopic findings. No false negative diagnosis occurred. Laparoscopy may become the “gold standard” in the management of lymphoproliferative disease in the following settings: for the differential diagnosis of hepatic and/or splenic focal lesions; when percutaneous needle biopsy fails and/or genetic analysis is needed for therapeutic decision; for the primary diagnosis and abdominal staging of patients with diffuse retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy in the absence of peripheral lymphadenopathy; for cases of abdominal restaging after concurrent chemoradiotherapy and in cases of suspected relapse when percutaneous biopsy is not technically possible; and for patients with lymphoproliferative disease when splenectomy is required. Marked splenomegaly with perisplenic inflammatory reaction and lymphadenopathy in HIV+ patients should be considered possible causes of failure of the laparoscopic approach.