Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer and Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

  • Chapter
Robotic Urology

  • 976 Accesses

Abstract

In the era of routine usage of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for the diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer, the validity of the clinical diagnosis of localized prostate cancer has improved. Large contemporary series of radical prostatectomy (RP) by any surgical method consist mostly of truly localized and node-negative cases; thus, due to the stage-shift following the widespread use of PSA testing, the incidence of positive nodes in patients undergoing RP has declined. Therefore, many groups prefer not to perform pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with a low likelihood of harboring nodal metastases. However, there are also good arguments for routine pelvic lymphadenectomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahlering TE, Woo D, Eichel L, Lee DI, Edwards R, Skarecky DW (2004) Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatedtomy: a comparison of one surgeon’s outcome. Urology 63(5):819−822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Albertsen PC, Hanley JA, Barrows GH, Penson DF, Kowalczyk PD, Sanders MM, Fine J (2005) Prostate cancer and the Will Rogers phenomenon. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(17):1248−1253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Allaf ME, Palapattu GS, Trock BJ, Carter HB, Walsh PC (2004) Anatomical extent of lymph node dissection: impact: impact on men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 172(5 Pt 1):1840−1844

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Allaf ME, Partin AW, Carter HB (2006) The importance of pelvic lymph node dissection in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Rev Urol 8(3):112−119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R (2006) Prospective evaluation of concomitant lymphadenectomy in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Endourol 20(7):514−518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Atug F, Castle EP, Woods M, Srivastav SK, Thomas R, Davis R (2006) Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: Is one better than the other? Urology 68(5):1077−1081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bader P, Burckhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE (2002) Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol 168(2):514−518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bader P, Burckhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE (2003) Disease progression and survival of patients with positive lymph nodes after radical prostatectomy. Is there a chance of cure? J Urol 169(3):849−854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, Brautigam R, Kramer W, Binder J (2003) Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one-year follow-up. Eur Urol 44(2):175−181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Berglund RK, Sadetsky N, DuChane J, Carroll PR, Klein EA (2007) Limited pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of radical prostatectomy does not affect 5-year failure rates for low, intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer: results from CaPSURE. J Urol 177:526−529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bhatta Dhar N, Reuther AM, Zippe C, Klein EA (2004) No difference in six-year biochemical failure rates with or without pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy in low-risk patients with localized prostate cancer. Urology 63(3):528−531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bluestein DL, Bostwick DG, Bergstrahl EJ, Oesterling JE (1994) Eliminating the need for bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in select patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 151: 1315−1320

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Gallina A, Farina E, Da Pozzo LF, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI (2006) Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion based on the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 98(4):788−793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Gallina A, Zanni G, Scattoni V, Valiquette L, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI (2007) Critical assessment of ideal nodal yield at pelvic lymphadenectomy to accurately diagnose prostate cancer nodal metastasis in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 69(1):147−151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Burckhard FC, Bader P, Schneider E, Markwalder R, Studer UE (2002) Reliability of preoperative values to determine the need for lymphadenectomy in patients with prostate cancer and meticulous lymph node dissection. Eur Urol 42(2):84−90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Burckhard FC, Schumacher MC, Studer UE (2006) An extended pelvic lymph-node dissection should be performed in most patients if radical prostatectomy is truly indicated. Nat Clin Pract Urol 3(9):454−455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Ohori M, Rabbani F, Gerigk C, Reuter V, Graefen M, Hammerer PG, Erbersdobler A, Kupelian P, Klein E, Quinn DI, Henshall SM, Grygiel JJ, Sutherland RL, Stricker PD, Morash CG, Scardino PT, Kattan MW (2003) A preoperative nonogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 170(5):1798−1803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Catalona WJ, Carvahal GF, Mager DE, Smith DS (1999) Potency, continence and complication rates in 1,870 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol 162:433−438

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cheng L, Bergstrahl EJ, Cheville JC, Slezak J, Corica FA, Zincke H, Blute ML, Bostwick DG (1998). Cancer volume of lymph node metastasis predicts progression in prostate cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 22(12):1491−1500

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MJ, Chang SS, Smith ER Jr, Wells N, Smith JA Jr (2003) Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 169(1):145−147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Conrad S, Graefen M, Pichlmeier U, Henke RP, Hammerer PG (1998) Systematic sextant biopsies improve preoperative prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 159(6):2023−2229

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Daneshmand S, Quek ML, Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Cai J, Pinski J, Skinner EC, Skinner DG (2004) Prognosis of patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy: long-term results. J Urol 172(6):2252−2255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. DiMarco DS, Zincke H, Sebo TJ, Slezak J, Bergstrahl EJ, Blute ML (2005) The extent of lymphadenectomy for pTxN0 prostate cancer does not affect prostate cancer outcome in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol 173(4):1121−1125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Epstein JI, Oesterling JE, Egglestone JC, Walsh PC (1986) Frozen section detection of lymph node metastases in prostatic carcinoma: accuracy in grossly uninvolved pelvic lymphadenectomy specimens. J Urol 136:1234−1237

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK (1985) The Will Rogers phenomenon. Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 312(25):1604−1608

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Fukuda M, Egawa M, Imao T, Takasima H, Yokoyama K, Namiki M (2007) Detection of sentinel node micrometastasis by step section and immunohistochemistry in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol 177(4):1313−1317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Golimbu M, Provet J, Al-Askari S, Morales P (1987) Radical prostatectomy for stage D1 prostate cancer. Prognostic variables and results of treatment. Urology 47(5): 427−435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Guilloneau B, Cappele O, Martinez JB, Navarra S, Vallancien G (2001) Robotic assisted laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in humans. J Urol 165(4):1078−1081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Guilloneau B, el-Fettouh H, Baumert H et al. (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169(1261)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Haese A, Epstein JI, Huland H, Partin AW (2002) Validation of a biopsy-based pathologic algorithm for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with clinically localized prostatic carcinoma. Cancer 95:1016−1021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hakenberg OW (2005) The incidence and treatment of lymphoceles after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 96(9):1422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Knobloch R von (2002) Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol 167(4):1681−1686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Heinzer H, Hammerer P, Graefen M, Huland H (1998) Thromboembolic complications rate after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Impact of routine ultrasonography for the detection of pelvic lymphoceles and hematomas. Eur Urol 33(1):86−90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Huland H (2006) The case against extended lymph-node dissection for prostate cancer. Nat Clin Pract Urol 3(9):456−457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jeschke S, Manbirajan T, Leeb K, Ziegerhofer J, Sega W, Janetschek G (2005) Detection of early lymph node metastases in prostate cancer by laparoscopic radioisotope guided sentinel node dissection. J Urol 173(6):1943−1946

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kavoussi LR, Sosa E, Chandhoke P, Chodak G, Clayman RV, Hadley HR, Loughlin KR, Ruckle HC, Rukstalis D, Schuessler W (1993) Complications of laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection. J Urol 149(2): 322−325

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Masterson TA, Bianco FJ Jr, Vickers AJ, DiBlasio CJ, Fearn PA, Rabbani F, Eastham JA, Scardino PT (2006) The association between total and positive lymph node counts and disease progression in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 175(4):1320−1324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J, and members of the VIP team (2003) Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: technique. J Urol 169(6):2289−2292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mottrie A, van Migem P, de Naeyer G, Schatteman P, Carpentier P, Fonteyne E (2007) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of 184 cases. Eur Urol (doi:10.1016/j.eururo.200702.029).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Partin AW, Kattan MV, Subong ENP, Walsh PC, Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, Scardino PT, Pearson JD (1997) Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. J Am Med Assoc 277:1445−1451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Partin AW, Mangold LA, Lamm DM, Walsh PC, Epstein JI, Pearson JD (2001) Contemporaray update of the prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin tables) for the new millenium. Urology 51:258−264

    Google Scholar 

  42. Partin AW, Yoo JK, Carter HB et al. (1993) The use of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men with localized prostate cancer. J Urol 150:110

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Su L-M (2006) Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: critical analysis of results. Eur Urol 49:612−624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Teber D et al. (2005) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: oncological results in the first 500 patients. J Urol 173:761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Solberg A, Angelsen A, Bergan U, Haugen OA, Viset T, Klepp O (2003) Frequency of lymphoceles after open and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol 37(3):218−221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Spring DB, Schroeder D, Babu S, Agee R, Gooding GA (1981) Ultrasonic evaluation of lymphocele formation after staging lymphadenectomy for prostatic carcinoma. Radiology 141(2):479−483

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Do M et al. (2005) Endoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological and functional results after 700 procedures. J Urol 174:1271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Stone NN, Stock RG, Unger P (1997) Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: comparison of the extended and modified techniques. J Urol 158(5):1891−1894

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Touijer K, Guilloneau B (2006) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a critical analysis of surgical quality. Eur Urol 49:625−632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ward JF, Slezak JM, Blute ML, Bergstrahl EJ, Zincke H (2005) Radical prostatectomy for clinically advanced (cT3) prostate cancer since the advent of prostate-specific antigen testing: 15-year outcome. BJU Int 95(6):751−756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Warncke SH, Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Z’brun S, Krause T, Studer UE (2007) Detection rate and operating time required for gamma probe-guided sentinel lymph node resection after injection of technetium-99m nanocolloid into the prostate with and without preoperative imaging. Eur Urol Epub ahead of print

    Google Scholar 

  52. Wawroschek F, Vogt H, Wengenmair H, Weckermann D, Hamm D, Keil M, Graf G, Heidenreich P, Harzmann R (2003) Prostate lymphoscintigraphy and radio-guided surgery for sentinel lymph node identification in prostate cancer. Technique and results of the first 350 cases. Urol Int 70:303−310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Weckermann D, Dorn R, Trefz M, Wagner T, Wawroschek F, Harzmann R (2007) Sentinel lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: experience with more than 1,000 patients. J Urol 177(3):916−920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wirth MP, Hakenberg OW, Froehner M (2007) Optimal treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer. World J Urol 25(2):169−176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Wyler SF, Sulser T, Seifert HH, Ruszat R, Forster TH, Gasser TC, Bachmann A (2006) Laparoscopic extended pelvic lymph node dissection for high-risk prostate cancer. Urology 68(4):883−887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Strasse 6, 18055, Rostock, Germany

    O.W. Hakenberg

  2. Universitätsklinikum Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany

    M.P. Wirth

Authors
  1. O.W. Hakenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M.P. Wirth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Zentrum für Urologie, Klinik Hirslanden, 8032, Zurich, Switzerland

    Hubert John

  2. Department of Urology, Karolinska University Hospital, 17176, Stockholm, Sweden

    Peter Wiklund

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hakenberg, O., Wirth, M. (2008). Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer and Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. In: John, H., Wiklund, P. (eds) Robotic Urology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74140-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74140-4_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74139-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-74140-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation