Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 10/2019

14.01.2019 | Original Article

Oncological outcome of patients treated with spot-specific salvage lymphnode dissection (sLND) for positron-emission tomography (PET)-positive prostate cancer (PCa) relapse

verfasst von: Andreas Hiester, Alessandro Nini, Günter Niegisch, Christian Arsov, Hubertus Hautzel, Christina Antke, Lars Schimmöller, Peter Albers, Robert Rabenalt

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 10/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To report pre-, postoperative and oncological outcomes in patients treated with spot-specific sLND for patients with exclusive nodal recurrence after PCa primary treatment.

Materials and methods

With regard to salvage treatment failure (sTF), 46 consecutive patients, undergoing 52 sLND for nodal recurrence detected by PET/CT scan were stratified in 3 groups (group A: post-sLND PSA nadir < 0.01 ng/ml and in follow-up reaching a value > 0.2 ng/ml, group B: post-sLND PSA nadir > 0.01 ng/ml and in follow-up reaching a value equal to pre-sLND PSA; group C: additional salvage treatment administration). Surgical outcome of patients was analyzed by descriptive statistics (Student‘s t test for continuous variables, Chi-square and Fisher‘s test for categorial ones). Time to sTF of each group was analyzed and compared by Kaplan–Meier method and correlations regarding sTF and pre-sLND PSA, time from PCa primary treatment to PET/CT scan, time from PCa primary treatment to sLND and number of positive PET/CT scan spots were assessed.

Results

Median PSA at PET/CT scan was 2.9 ng/ml (IQR 1.2–6.1). Open and laparoscopic sLND were performed in 40/52 (77%) and 12/52 (23%), respectively. Median number of removed lymph nodes was 6 (IQR 4–13). Histological report was positive for PCa in 39/52 sLND (75%). Median blood loss was 50 ml (IQR 0–50, range 0–600). Median length of hospital stay was 5 days (IQR 4–6). 4 and 7 patients had low-grade (I/II) and high-grade (≥ III) Clavien–Dindo complications, respectively. Readmission rates at 30 and 90 days were 5/52 (9.6%) and 1/52 (2%), respectively. sTF was observed in 2/7 (group A), 12/12 (group B) and 22/22 patients (group C). Median time to sTF in group B and C was 3.5 (IQR 1.7–13.2) and 4 months (IQR 2.0–10), respectively.

Conclusion

Even spot-specific PET/CT sLND harbors a measurable (CD > III) morbidity in 1 out of 7 patients. Only patients with positive histological report and a PSA nadir < 0.01 ng/ml after sLND seem to experience a long-term benefit. Patients with a PSA nadir > 0.01 ng/ml have a delay of systemic treatment of up to 4 months. sLND remains an experimental approach and long-term oncological benefit needs an improved selection of patients.
Literatur
4.
Zurück zum Zitat van Leeuwen PJ, Stricker P, Hruby G, Kneebone A, Ting F, Thompson B, Nguyen Q, Ho B, Emmett L (2016) (68) Ga-PSMA has a high detection rate of prostate cancer recurrence outside the prostatic fossa in patients being considered for salvage radiation treatment. BJU Int 117(5):732–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13397 CrossRefPubMed van Leeuwen PJ, Stricker P, Hruby G, Kneebone A, Ting F, Thompson B, Nguyen Q, Ho B, Emmett L (2016) (68) Ga-PSMA has a high detection rate of prostate cancer recurrence outside the prostatic fossa in patients being considered for salvage radiation treatment. BJU Int 117(5):732–739. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bju.​13397 CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A, Di Trapani E, Scattoni V, Vizziello D, Cucchiara V, Bertini R, Colombo R, Picchio M, Giovacchini G, Montorsi F, Briganti A (2015) Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol 67(2):299–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.011 CrossRefPubMed Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Gallina A, Di Trapani E, Scattoni V, Vizziello D, Cucchiara V, Bertini R, Colombo R, Picchio M, Giovacchini G, Montorsi F, Briganti A (2015) Long-term outcomes of salvage lymph node dissection for clinically recurrent prostate cancer: results of a single-institution series with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Eur Urol 67(2):299–309. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2014.​02.​011 CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Rigatti P, Suardi N, Briganti A, Da Pozzo LF, Tutolo M, Villa L, Gallina A, Capitanio U, Abdollah F, Scattoni V, Colombo R, Freschi M, Picchio M, Messa C, Guazzoni G, Montorsi F (2011) Pelvic/retroperitoneal salvage lymph node dissection for patients treated with radical prostatectomy with biochemical recurrence and nodal recurrence detected by [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Urol 60(5):935–943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.07.060 CrossRefPubMed Rigatti P, Suardi N, Briganti A, Da Pozzo LF, Tutolo M, Villa L, Gallina A, Capitanio U, Abdollah F, Scattoni V, Colombo R, Freschi M, Picchio M, Messa C, Guazzoni G, Montorsi F (2011) Pelvic/retroperitoneal salvage lymph node dissection for patients treated with radical prostatectomy with biochemical recurrence and nodal recurrence detected by [11C]choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Urol 60(5):935–943. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2011.​07.​060 CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T, van den Bergh RCN, Yuan CY, Briers E, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Cornford P, De Santis M, MacPepple E, Henry AM, Mason MD, Matveev VB, van der Poel HG, van der Kwast TH, Rouviere O, Schoots IG, Wiegel T, Lam TB, Mottet N, Joniau S (2017) The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 72(1):84–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003 CrossRefPubMed Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T, van den Bergh RCN, Yuan CY, Briers E, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Cornford P, De Santis M, MacPepple E, Henry AM, Mason MD, Matveev VB, van der Poel HG, van der Kwast TH, Rouviere O, Schoots IG, Wiegel T, Lam TB, Mottet N, Joniau S (2017) The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 72(1):84–109. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2016.​12.​003 CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Mandel P, Steuber T, Ahyai S, Kriegmair M, Schiffmann J, Boehm K, Heinzer H, Michl U, Schlomm T, Haese A, Huland H, Graefen M, Tilki D (2016) Salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer: verification of European Association of Urology guideline criteria. BJU Int 117(1):55–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13103 CrossRefPubMed Mandel P, Steuber T, Ahyai S, Kriegmair M, Schiffmann J, Boehm K, Heinzer H, Michl U, Schlomm T, Haese A, Huland H, Graefen M, Tilki D (2016) Salvage radical prostatectomy for recurrent prostate cancer: verification of European Association of Urology guideline criteria. BJU Int 117(1):55–61. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bju.​13103 CrossRefPubMed
14.
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Sogani PC, Watson RC, Whitmore WF Jr (1981) Lymphocele after pelvic lymphadenectomy for urologic cancer. Urology 17(1):39–43CrossRef Sogani PC, Watson RC, Whitmore WF Jr (1981) Lymphocele after pelvic lymphadenectomy for urologic cancer. Urology 17(1):39–43CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167(4):1681–1686CrossRef Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167(4):1681–1686CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Loeb S, Partin AW, Schaeffer EM (2010) Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy: do the risks outweigh the benefits? Rev Urol 12(1):20–24PubMedPubMedCentral Loeb S, Partin AW, Schaeffer EM (2010) Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy: do the risks outweigh the benefits? Rev Urol 12(1):20–24PubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Porres D, Pfister D, Thissen A, Kuru TH, Zugor V, Buettner R, Knuechel R, Verburg FA, Heidenreich A (2017) The role of salvage extended lymph node dissection in patients with rising PSA and PET/CT scan detected nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20(1):85–92. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2016.54 CrossRefPubMed Porres D, Pfister D, Thissen A, Kuru TH, Zugor V, Buettner R, Knuechel R, Verburg FA, Heidenreich A (2017) The role of salvage extended lymph node dissection in patients with rising PSA and PET/CT scan detected nodal recurrence of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20(1):85–92. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​pcan.​2016.​54 CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Fossati N, Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Bravi CA, Robesti D, Soligo M, Karnes RJ, Schmautz M, Heidenreich A, Herlemann A, Gratzke C, Stief C, Battaglia A, Everaerts W, Joniau S, Van Poppel H, Kalz A, Osmonov D, Juenemann K, Rajarubendra N, Gill IS, Mottrie A, Montorsi F, Briganti A (2018) Assessing the under-estimation of nodal tumour burden by 68 Ga-PSMA and 11C-choline PET/CT scan in patients treated with salvage lymph node dissection for nodal recurrence of prostate cancer: a large multi-institutional analysis. Eur Urol Suppl 17(2):e1709–e1710CrossRef Fossati N, Suardi N, Gandaglia G, Bravi CA, Robesti D, Soligo M, Karnes RJ, Schmautz M, Heidenreich A, Herlemann A, Gratzke C, Stief C, Battaglia A, Everaerts W, Joniau S, Van Poppel H, Kalz A, Osmonov D, Juenemann K, Rajarubendra N, Gill IS, Mottrie A, Montorsi F, Briganti A (2018) Assessing the under-estimation of nodal tumour burden by 68 Ga-PSMA and 11C-choline PET/CT scan in patients treated with salvage lymph node dissection for nodal recurrence of prostate cancer: a large multi-institutional analysis. Eur Urol Suppl 17(2):e1709–e1710CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Oncological outcome of patients treated with spot-specific salvage lymphnode dissection (sLND) for positron-emission tomography (PET)-positive prostate cancer (PCa) relapse
verfasst von
Andreas Hiester
Alessandro Nini
Günter Niegisch
Christian Arsov
Hubertus Hautzel
Christina Antke
Lars Schimmöller
Peter Albers
Robert Rabenalt
Publikationsdatum
14.01.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 10/2019
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02633-w

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2019

World Journal of Urology 10/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.