腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除术在子宫内膜癌治疗中的临床意义

目的探讨子宫内膜癌患者腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除范围及其临床意义。方法回顾四川大学华西第二医院709例患者的临床-病理资料,随访217例行腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除患者的生存情况。结果多因素分析发现：淋巴脉管浸润及盆腔淋巴结转移是发生腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移的独立高危因素（P〈0.05）。腹主动脉旁淋巴结取样组,切除至肠系膜下血管水平组以及肾血管水平组术后10月生存率分别为：98.6%,94.3%和100.0%。结论中低分化、淋巴脉管转移、特殊病理类型、以及晚期子宫内膜癌患者建议切除腹主动脉旁淋巴结,其切除范围应至肾血管水平。     

子宫内膜癌手术范围的前瞻性临床研究

目的：探讨子宫内膜癌的适宜手术范围。方法：对１０５例子宫内膜癌患者施行广泛性或次广泛性子宫切除术加盆腔及（或）主动脉旁淋巴清扫术；另对３６例子宫内膜癌患者仅作次广泛性子宫切除术，对本组１４１例的手术切除标本，包括宫旁结缔组织及淋巴结、盆腔主动脉旁淋巴结等进行病理学检查。结果，１０５例中，盆腔淋巴结发生转移１９例，占１８．１０％，除１ａ期外，余各期均有淋巴转移发生。Ｉｂ、Ｉｃ期淋巴结转移率分别为８．     

腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除在子宫内膜癌手术治疗中的意义

目的:探讨腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除对子宫内膜癌手术病理分期及预后的影响。方法:回顾性分析我院行系统性盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除的68例子宫内膜癌患者的临床病理资料。结果:15例(22.1%)发生淋巴结转移的患者中,12例(17.6%)发生盆腔淋巴结转移,7例(10.3%)发生腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移,其中4例(5.9%)患者同时出现盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移,3例(4.4%)为单纯腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移。临床分期与手术病理分期不符合率为22.1%。术后随访6～57个月,平均26个月,获访率100%,1例复发,1例复发并死亡。结论:系统性盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除术不仅对进行准确的手术病理分期,指导术后辅助治疗有重要意义,而且能提供预后相关信息。     

磁共振成像与术中病灶探查诊断子宫内膜癌肌层浸润及盆腹腔淋巴结转移临床价值研究

目的探讨磁共振成像(MRI)和术中病灶探查在子宫内膜癌肌层浸润及盆腹腔淋巴结转移诊断中的临床应用价值。方法回顾性分析上海交通大学附属第九人民医院2010年1月至2014年3月收治的33例行全子宫+双侧附件切除术+盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴清扫术的子宫内膜癌患者临床资料,以手术病理诊断为标准,比较术前MRI检查、术中病灶探查在诊断肿瘤侵犯子宫肌层深度和淋巴结转移的符合率。结果 MRI检查发现有肌层浸润33例,其中浅肌层浸润8例,深肌层浸润25例;术中剖视子宫标本发现有肌层浸润33例,其中浅肌层浸润6例,深肌层浸润27例。术后病理结果浅肌层浸润6例,深肌层浸润27例。提示MRI诊断浅肌层浸润敏感度100.00%,特异度92.59%。诊断深肌层浸润敏感度92.59%,特异度100.00%;术中病灶剖视诊断深浅肌层浸润敏感度和特异度均为100.00%。33例患者中经病理组织学确诊,8例患者出现淋巴转移,其中仅有盆腔淋巴结转移4例,盆腔及腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移2例,仅有腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移2例;33例患者术前MRI检查提示2例淋巴结转移,漏诊6例,MRI诊断淋巴结转移的敏感度25%;病灶探查发现4例盆腔淋巴结肿大(病理证实2例阳性,2例阴性),2例腹主动脉旁淋巴结肿大(1例阳性,1例阴性)。3例患者因淋巴结转移分期升级,术后需要辅以化疗和(或)放疗。结论子宫内膜癌患者术前MRI检查对判断肌层浸润深度准确率较高,手术中子宫标本的剖视与病理组织学检查相同,具有重要价值;而MRI检查和术中淋巴结探查对判断子宫内膜癌患者淋巴结转移的意义不大。盆腔及腹主动脉旁(至肾静脉水平)淋巴清扫可以使手术病理分期更准确,为患者术后提供更合理的治疗指导。     

子宫内膜癌淋巴结切除意义及指征

子宫内膜癌采用手术病理分期,然而是否对所有子宫内膜癌患者都行全面分期手术(全子宫切除术+双附件切除术+双侧盆腔淋巴结及腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除)争议广泛,尤其是对于早期子宫内膜癌患者淋巴结切除的价值值得探讨。文章回顾子宫内膜癌淋巴结切除的最新研究进展,进一步讨论淋巴结切除的意义及指征。     

腹腔镜下腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除在子宫内膜癌诊治中的临床研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜下腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除在子宫内膜癌诊治中的应用价值及安全性、可行性。方法:选择2010年3月至2014年3月子宫内膜癌患者89例,其中,行腹腔镜下腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除手术50例(腹腔镜组),传统开腹腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除手术39例(开腹组),比较两组围手术期情况、术中及术后并发症、预后,统计分析淋巴结转移患者临床病理特征。结果:腹腔镜组和开腹组患者在切除的淋巴结数目上差异无统计学意义(P0.05),腹腔镜组较开腹组腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除出血量少、术后病率低、术后肛门排气时间早、术后住院时间短,但切除腹主动脉旁淋巴结时间长于开腹组,两组比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.01,P0.05)。腹腔镜组与开腹组在术中腔静脉损伤、术后尿潴留、淋巴囊肿、深静脉血栓、肺动脉栓塞发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),而开腹组切口裂开4例,腹腔镜组无切口裂开,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后发现盆腔和(或)腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移共8例,除术前1例患者发现脐部癌转移诊断为ⅣB期和1例患者磁共振成像提示盆腔淋巴结肿大癌转移诊断ⅢC1期与术后病理诊断相同外,其余6例分期均较术前升高。两组术后随访:开腹组复发2例,其中1例死亡;腹腔镜组复发1例后死亡,均为晚期子宫内膜癌患者。结论:腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除是子宫内膜癌规范化诊治的重要组成部分,在对子宫内膜癌患者准确分期、制定精确术后诊治方案,改善预后方面作用是肯定的,腹腔镜下腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除手术安全可行,优于传统开腹手术。     

Ⅲc期子宫内膜癌患者多种方法治疗的生存

为探讨接受多种方法治疗的Ⅲc期子宫内膜癌患者的并发症和生存情况对治疗结果进行分析。 选择1994～1998年间,因子宫内膜癌而经腹全子宫和双附件切除、腹腔细胞学检查、盆腔和腹主动脉旁淋巴结清扫术的患者153例,有淋巴结转移者22例。盆腔淋巴结包括髂外、髂内血管、闭孔神经以上区域的所有淋巴组织;腹主动脉淋巴结为从血管分叉到十二指肠区域腹主动脉和下腔静脉周围的淋巴组织。平均切除的盆腔淋巴结数18个,腹主动脉旁淋巴结6个。盆腔淋巴结转移者予全盆腔放疗,腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移者获盆腔烟囱野放疗。均加行卡铂AUC5和紫杉醇化疗6个疗程。SPSS软件对结果进行统计学分析。Kaplan-Meier分析生存情况。     

358例子宫内膜癌手术方式及影响预后的危险因素分析

目的:探讨子宫内膜癌的手术方式及影响预后的危险因素。方法:回顾性分析资料完整、初治为手术治疗并经病理学诊断确诊,且进行系统分期手术的358例子宫内膜癌患者的临床情况及手术方式,并进行随访。对可能影响子宫内膜癌患者预后的危险因素进行分析。结果:358例患者中位发病年龄52岁(20~78岁),3年总体无瘤生存率分别为Ⅰ期97.12%,Ⅱ期91.67%;Ⅲ期85.19%,复发及死亡14例。开腹手术326例(91.06%),腹腔镜手术32例(8.94%)。与开腹组手术患者比较,腹腔镜组手术时间较长、平均估计术中失血量较少且平均住院时间短,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。单因素分析表明,有内科合并症、手术病理分期晚、仅行盆腔淋巴结取样、脉管癌栓阳性、盆腔和(或)腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移是影响子宫内膜癌患者预后的危险因素;多因素分析表明,盆腔淋巴结转移是影响子宫内膜癌患者预后的独立危险因素(P=0.000,OR=11.901,95%CI3.291~43.039)。结论:子宫内膜癌以开腹手术为主,腹腔镜手术显示了微创的优势。手术病理分期晚期、伴有内科合并症、仅行盆腔淋巴结取样术、脉管癌栓阳性、腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移,特别是有盆腔淋巴结转移的子宫内膜癌患者预后差。     

子宫内膜癌前哨淋巴结检测方法及意义

关于是否对早期子宫内膜癌患者进行淋巴结切除术以及淋巴结切除术的范围一直存在争议。国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)2009年对子宫内膜癌的手术临床分期进行修改之后,更引起了对淋巴结切除术的探讨。FIGO建议,子宫内膜癌的基本手术范围包括腹水冲洗、筋膜外全子宫和双附件切除、盆腔或加腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除[1]。淋巴结状况和子宫内膜癌患者的无病生存率和总生存率密切相关[2],但关于淋巴结切除术的必要性和范围缺乏     

子宫内膜癌腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除范围探讨

目的探讨子宫内膜癌腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除范围。方法收集2014年1月至2016年7月辽宁省肿瘤医院收治的子宫内膜癌患者149例。分为两组:研究组(高位腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除)共36例,对照组(低位腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除)共113例。对两组临床病理资料进行总结,分析子宫内膜癌淋巴结转移率、手术情况及术后并发症。结果研究组腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移率为11.1%,高位腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移率为5.6%;对照组低位腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移率为8.8%,其中孤立性腹主动脉旁淋巴结转移3例,转移率2.7%。手术时间研究组[(205±58)min]长于对照组[(175±37)min],差异有统计学意义(P0.05),术中出血量、术中输血情况两组差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术后并发症淋巴囊肿、淋巴脓肿、下肢静脉血栓、肠梗阻、神经损伤、乳糜漏、二次手术发生率两组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论子宫内膜癌行腹主动脉旁淋巴结切除时不应该忽视肾血管水平淋巴结。     

The role of laparoscopic lymphadenectomy in the management of cervical carcinoma.

Laparoscopic lymphadenectomy was performed on 18 patients with invasive carcinoma of the cervix prior to definitive radiation therapy and/or radical hysterectomy. Ten patients underwent pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomies prior to planned radiotherapy. Two of these patients had grossly positive pelvic nodes, and one had a microscopically positive para-aortic node. Eight patients with early disease were considered candidates for radical hysterectomy and underwent laparoscopic lymphadenectomy. Three of these patients were found to have positive pelvic lymph nodes and the hysterectomy was abandoned. Five patients underwent radical hysterectomies immediately following their laparoscopic procedures. The average number of lymph nodes removed laparoscopically in these patients was 31.4; the average number of additional lymph nodes resected at laparotomy with the radical hysterectomy was 2.8. A single microscopically positive parametrial lymph node was found on permanent section in 1 patient with radical hysterectomy. No significant complications were associated with the laparoscopic lymphadenectomies. Nine of the 13 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures only were discharged on Postoperative Day 1. The ability to perform pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy allows for complete surgical staging of carcinoma of the cervix laparoscopically.     

Laparoscopic-assisted vaginal versus abdominal surgery in patients with endometrial cancer--a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: We compared a laparoscopic-vaginal approach with the conventional abdominal approach for treatment of patients with endometrial cancer. METHOD: Between July 1995 and August 1999, 70 patients with endometrial cancer FIGO stage I-III were randomized to laparoscopic-assisted simple or radical vaginal hysterectomy or simple or radical abdominal hysterectomy with or without lymph node dissection. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were treated in the laparoscopic versus 33 patients in the laparotomy group. Lymph node dissection was performed in 25 patients by laparoscopy and in 24 patients by laparotomy. Blood loss and transfusion rates were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group. Yield of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes, duration of surgery, and incidence of postoperative complications were similar for both groups. Overall and recurrence-free survival did not differ significantly for both groups. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic-vaginal approach for treatment of endometrial cancer is associated with lower perioperative morbidity compared with the conventional abdominal approach.     

Pattern and clinical predictors of lymph node metastases in epithelial ovarian cancer

Para-aortic lymphadenectomy is part of staging in early epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) and could be part of therapy in advanced EOC. However, only a minority of patients receive therapy according to guidelines or have attendance to a specialized unit. We analyzed pattern of lymphatic spread of EOC and evaluated if clinical factors and intraoperative findings reliably could predict lymph node involvement, in order to evaluate if patients could be identified in whom lymphadenectomy could be omitted and who should not be referred to a center with capacity of performing extensive gynecological operations. Retrospective analysis was carried out of all patients with EOC who had systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy during primary cytoreductive surgery. One hundred ninety-five patients underwent systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Histologic lymph node metastases were found in 53%. The highest frequency was found in the upper left para-aortic region (32% of all patients) and between vena cava inferior and abdominal aorta (36%). Neither intraoperative clinical diagnosis nor frozen section of pelvic nodes could reliably predict para-aortic lymph node metastasis. The pathologic diagnosis of the pelvic nodes, if used as diagnostic tool for para-aortic lymph nodes, showed a sensitivity of only 50% in ovarian cancer confined to the pelvis and 73% in more advanced disease. We could not detect any intraoperative tool that could reliably predict pathologic status of para-aortic lymph nodes. Systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy remains part of staging in EOC. Patients with EOC should be offered the opportunity to receive state-of-the-art treatment including surgery.     

Maylard incision for radical hysterectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection

Angioli R, Koechli OR, Sevin B-U. Maylard incision for radical hysterectomy and pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1998; 8 : 274–278.
Although the transverse, muscle-splitting technique for abdominal incision (Maylard incision) has been described for radical hysterectomy and for lymph node dissection of the pelvis and para-aortic area, the adequacy of the procedure performed through this incision has not been assessed. From 1991 to 1994, 205 patients underwent radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node (PLN) and para-aortic lymph node (PALN) dissection at the Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Jackson Memorial Hospital/University of Miami School of Medicine. Twenty-four patients with cervical cancer stage IB-IIA underwent radical hysterectomy, pelvic lymph node and para-aortic lymph node dissection through a Maylard incision. Three patients had panniculectomy performed at the same time. Duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, number of pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes removed and duration of hospital stay were within acceptable ranges. Postoperative and intraoperative complications were minimal. Excellent cosmetic results were obtained. In conclusion, the Maylard incision offers good exposure to the pelvic and para-aortic area for lymph node dissection, good cosmetic result, and can be performed in association with abdominoplasty. Complications are similar to those observed with a vertical skin incision. This type of incision should be considered in selected young patients with early cervical cancer and in obese patients desiring abdominoplasty.     

Laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the surgical staging of endometrial carcinoma

AIM: To evaluate and compare laparoscopic-assisted surgical staging with conventional laparotomy for the treatment of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: From July 2001 to December 2003, a retrospective review of patients with endometrial carcinoma was carried out. The medical records of those patients who had undergone surgical staging with hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLN) were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were operating time (OT), estimated blood loss, total number of lymph nodes yielded, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. RESULT: A total of 64 cases were identified. Two cases were excluded because of incomplete records. Two cases with para-aortic lymphadenectomy and four cases with Wertheim's hysterectomy were excluded from the study. Thirty-six patients underwent laparotomy with total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and PLN (laparotomy group). Twenty patients underwent the same surgery by laparoscopy, of which 19 were successfully carried out (laparoscopy group). One case was converted to laparotomy. The mean OT in the laparoscopy group was longer when compared with the laparotomy group (211 min vs 94 min, P < 0.001). The mean estimated blood loss in the laparoscopy group was less (200 mL vs 513 mL, P < 0.001). The post-operative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopy group (3.6 days vs 7.7 days, P < 0.001). The mean number of lymph nodes yielded was more in the laparoscopy group (26.1 vs 16.7, P = 0.004). Neither group had intraoperative complications and both had similar postoperative complication rates. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic-assisted surgical staging for endometrial carcinoma is associated with significantly less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, longer OT time, and more lymph nodes yielded when compared with laparotomy.     

Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer

Study ObjectiveTo determine the learning curve for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy for surgical treatment of endometrial cancer.DesignAn analysis of robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy vs total laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy and laparotomy with total abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (Canadian Task Force classification II-1).SettingSolo, experienced, minimally invasive gynecologic oncology practice in a tertiary hospital.PatientsOne hundred forty-eight patients including 56 patients who underwent robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection, 56 patients who underwent total laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection, and 36 patients who underwent traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection performed by the same surgeon for treatment of endometrial cancer.InterventionsRobotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy, total laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy, and traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy were performed. Data were categorized by chronologic order of cases into groups of 20 patients each. The learning curve of the surgical procedure was estimated by measuring operative time with respect to chronologic order of each patient who had undergone the respective procedure.Measurements and Main ResultsFor the 3 surgical procedures, data analyzed included mean age, body mass index, operative time, blood loss, lymph node retrieval, and complications. Mean (SD); 95% confidence interval [CI]) operative time for the 3 procedures was statistically significant: 162.5 (53) minutes (95% CI, 148.6–176.4]), 192.3 (55.5) minutes (95% CI, 177.6–207.0), and 136.9 (32.3) minutes (95% CI, 126.3–147.5), respectively. Analysis of operative time for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymph node dissection with respect to chronologic order of each group of 20 cases demonstrated a decrease in operative time: 183.2 (69) minutes (95% CI; 153.0–213.4) for cases 1 to 20, 152.7 (39.8) minutes (95% CI, 135.3–170.1) for cases 21 to 40, and 148.8 (36.7) minutes (95% CI, 130.8–166.8) for cases 41 to 56. For the groups with laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy and traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy, there was no difference in operative time with respect to chronologic group order of cases. There was a difference between the number of lymph nodes retrieved between robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (26.7 [12.8]; 95% CI, 23.3–30.1) compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (45.1 [20.9]; 95% CI, 39.6–50.6) and traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (55.8 [23.4]; 95% CI, 48.2–63.4). The rate of intraoperative complications for laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy was 12.5% (7 of 56) compared with 0 % for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy. The rate of postoperative complications was 14.3% (8 of 56), 21.4% (12 of 56), and 19.4% (7 of 36), respectively, for the 3 groups. There was less blood loss with robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (89.3 [45.4]; 95% CI, 77.4–101.2) compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (209.1 [91.8]; 95% CI, 185.1–233.1) and traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (266.0 [145.1]; 95% CI, 218.6–313.4). Duration of hospitalization was shorter in the group with robotic-assisted hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (1.6 [0.7]; 95% CI, 1.4–1.8) compared with the groups who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral lymphadenectomy (2.6 [0.9]; 95% CI, 2.4–2.8) or traditional total abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy (4.9 [1.9]; 95% CI, (4.3–5.5).ConclusionThe learning curve for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymph node dissection seems to be easier compared with that for laparoscopic hysterectomy with lymph node dissection for surgical management of endometrial cancer.     

The role of laparoscopic hysterectomy and lymph node dissection in treatment of endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: The development of new diagnostic and surgical methods has brought a differentiated approach to surgery of endometrial cancer. The aim of this study was to verify the peri-and postoperative differences between laparoscopic and open procedure and prepare protocol for a second phase follow-up multicentric study. METHODS: The study includes 133 women with indications for surgery of endometrial cancer. A prospective multicentric study was undertaken at four centres in the Czech Republic. We evaluated differences in the peri-and postoperative outcomes. Sixty-eight patients treated laparoscopically were compared with 65 patients treated by an open procedure of hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy. RESULTS: Three patients with conversion were withdrawn from the study and another 65 patients (97%) from the laparoscopic group successfully completed the procedures. Laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy were performed based on the grade of the tumor and depth of myometrial invasion. Out of both groups, 75 patients underwent pelvic lymphadenectomy and 21 women underwent para-aortic lymph node dissection or sampling. Eleven patients had metastases in the pelvic or para-aortic nodes (11.7% versus 4.7% in the open procedure group). Deep myoinvasion over 50% was more frequently present in the group of abdominally-treated women. The rate of major complications (18 versus 14 cases) was higher in the laparoscopic group, but more wound infections were seen in the open procedure group. CONCLUSION: The study illustrates that the laparoscopic approach to surgery is feasible and it also may be considered for endometrial cancer which typically occurs in at risk and obese women. Recovery time is reduced by avoiding an abdominal incision. Laparoscopic surgery was performed successfully in 65 women and in 8 cases (11.7%) malignant spread outside to the regional lymph nodes was found. However, the selection of patients for laparoscopy should be done considering optimal benefit and safety.     

Analysis of clinicopathologic factors predicting para-aortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer

The purposes of this study were to compare the relationships between para-aortic lymph node metastasis and various clinicopathologic factors to evaluate whether para-aortic lymph node dissection is necessary when treating endometrial cancer. A retrospective study was performed on 841 patients with endometrial cancer, who underwent the initial surgery at the Keio University Hospital. Clinicopathologic factors related to para-aortic lymph node metastasis significant on a univariate analysis were analyzed in a multivariate fashion using a logistic model. According to the multivariate analysis, the clinicopathologic factor most strongly related to the existence of para-aortic lymph node metastasis was positive pelvic lymph node metastasis (P < 0.01). Among the 155 patients who underwent pelvic and para-aortic lymph node dissection, the difference of 5-year overall survival by the presence of retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis was examined by Kaplan-Meier method. The prognosis was poor even if para-aortic lymph node dissection was performed in cases of positive para-aortic lymph node metastasis. In conclusion, when deciding whether to perform para-aortic lymph node dissection in patients with endometrial cancer, it is necessary to consider the pelvic lymph nodal status. If there is no pelvic lymph node metastasis, it could not be necessary to perform para-aortic lymph node dissection.     

Potential therapeutic role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in node-positive endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the potential therapeutic role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PAL) in high-risk patients with endometrial cancer. METHODS: We studied two groups of patients with endometrial cancer who underwent operation at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) during the interval 1984 to 1993: (1) 137 patients at high risk for para-aortic lymph node involvement (myometrial invasion >50%, palpable positive pelvic nodes, or positive adnexae), excluding stage IV disease, and (2) 51 patients with positive nodes (pelvic or para-aortic), excluding stage IV disease. By our definition, PAL required removal of five or more para-aortic nodes. RESULTS: In both groups, no significant difference existed between patients who had PAL (PAL+) and those who did not (PAL-) in regard to clinical or pathologic variables, percentage irradiated, or surgical or radiation complications. Among the 137 high-risk patients, the 5-year progression-free survival was 62% and the 5-year overall survival was 71% for the PAL- group compared with 77 and 85%, respectively, for the PAL+ group (P = 0.12 and 0.06, respectively). For the 51 patients with positive nodes, the 5-year progression-free survival and 5-year overall survival for the PAL- group were 36 and 42% compared with 76 and 77% for the PAL+ group (P = 0.02 and 0.05, respectively). Lymph node recurrences were detected in 37% of the PAL- patients but in none of the PAL+ patients (P = 0.01). Multivariate analysis suggested that submission to PAL was a cogent predictor of progression-free survival (odds ratio = 0.25; P = 0.01) and overall survival (odds ratio = 0.23; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a potential therapeutic role for formal PAL in endometrial cancer.