Open Inguinal Lymphadenectomy Research Articles

A study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial investigating videoendoscopic radical inguinal lymphadenectomy versus open radical inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile cancer (VELRAD).

Penile cancer is a rare male genital malignancy. Surgical excision of the primary tumour is followed by radical inguinal lymphadenectomy if there is metastatic disease detected by biopsy, fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) or following sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with impalpable disease. However, radical inguinal lymphadenectomy is associated with a high morbidity rate, and there is increasing usage of a videoendoscopic approach as an alternative. A pragmatic, UK-wide multicentre feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), comparing videoendoscopic radical inguinal lymphadenectomy versus open radical inguinal lymphadenectomy. Patients will be identified and recruited from supraregional multi-disciplinary team meetings (sMDT) and must be aged 18 or over requiring inguinal lymphadenectomy, with no contraindications to surgical intervention for their cancer. Participants will be followed up for 6 months following randomisation. The primary outcome is the ability to recruit patients for randomisation across all selected sites and the rate of loss to follow-up. Other outcomes include acceptability of the trial and intervention to patients and healthcare professionals assessed by qualitative research and obtaining resource utilisation information for health economic analysis. There are currently no other published RCTs comparing videoendoscopic versus open radical inguinal lymphadenectomy. Ongoing study is required to determine whether randomising patients to either procedure is feasible and acceptable to patients. The results of this study may determine the design of a subsequent trial. Clinicaltrials.gov PRS registry, registration number NCT05592639. Date of registration: 13th October 2022, retrospectively registered.

Long-term follow-up of comparative study of open and endoscopic lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma.

Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma. The study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7m vs 59.8 ± 7.3m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different. The study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon's experience, what they like, and what resources are available.

Introducing minimally invasive inguinal lymph node dissection in a UK tertiary skin cancer service: Initial experience & outcomes

We report the first UK case series of minimally invasive inguinal lymphadenectomy (MILND) for patients with metastatic cutaneous pathology. This was a retrospective, single-centre, single-surgeon cohort study. Twenty-one patients who underwent MILND from May 2015 to February 2019 were included. Demographic data, disease burden, and surgical quality assurance parameters were analysed. Median age was 69 (IQR: 58-76) with 14 women (66%) and 7 men (33%). Eighteen (85%) patients had melanoma with the rest having other skin malignancies. The median number of nodes resected was eight (IQR:6-11) and the median N-ratio was 0.18 [0.05-1.00]. The median surgical time for the procedure was 180 minutes (IQR: 147-225) Seven (33%) patients had complications--three trivial and four (19%) grade IIIB. Only one case (the first) was converted to an open procedure. We report the first UK series of MILND in a cutaneous oncology service. Our results show that MILND is a safe technique that can be introduced into a busy NHS practice with a structured training program, with surgical quality assurance outcomes identical to open inguinal lymphadenectomy. Our learning curve was similar to previously published data.

Safety and feasibility of single-incision radical vulvectomy: a novel approach for the treatment of vulvar cancer.

BackgroundIn the process of decreasing the morbidity of wound-related complications after vulvectomy and IL for treating vulvar malignancy, we performed a novel surgical procedure—single-incision radical vulvectomy (SIRV). Here, we share our initial experience and report its safety and feasibility.MethodsPatients with advanced local vulvar tumors were sequentially enrolled in this prospective cohort study to undergo SIRV. While performing SIRV, routine radical vulvectomies were performed first. Subsequently, the flaps of the bridge area between the vulvectomy incisions and femoral triangles were separated and the lymph nodes underneath were removed. Anterior working spaces (AWS) before the femoral triangle were then made. The saphenous vein was carefully identified and retained, while the superficial and deep inguinal lymph nodes were removed from the medial to the lateral sides. After careful hemostasis, the wounds were sutured. Patient demographics, clinical data, pathologic data, operation time, node count, and complications were recorded.ResultsTen patients underwent SIRV for vulvar cancer. Average hospital stay was 11.70±3.16 (range, 9–13) days. The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 7.59±3.62 (range, 3–15) and 15.14±3.63 (range, 11–20) for per side or both sides of the groin. Blood loss was ≤35 mL. Three patients developed inguinal lymphoceles and underwent needle aspirations. Two patients had impaired wound healing and achieved healing after dressing change. No other postoperative complications were noted during follow-up.ConclusionsCompared with conventional open inguinal lymphadenectomy (COIL) and video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL), SIRV is a more minimally invasive procedure. Our short-term observations showed that SIRV is safe and feasible and has good future application prospects for vulvar cancer. However, definitive conclusions cannot be made. Therefore, long-term oncologic outcomes and large-scale clinical trials are warranted.

Short-Term Surgical Outcomes of Standard and Lateral Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy: A Multinational Retrospective Study

Background: Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) is a minimally invasive technique that gives superior surgical outcomes than open inguinal lymphadenectomy (IL) for treating lymph node metastasis in penile, vulvar, and skin cancers. This study compared surgical outcomes obtained with two different approaches of VEIL, standard VEIL and lateral VEIL (L-VEIL), in cancer patients. Methods: Sixty-two patients who underwent standard VEIL (n = 15) or L-VEIL (n = 47) for treatment of lymph node metastasis were evaluated retrospectively from three centers in Brazil, Egypt, and India. Primary endpoint analyzed was conversion rate to open IL in the two groups, and the secondary endpoints included operative time, estimated blood loss, nodal yield, nodal positivity, postoperative drain duration, and postoperative complications. Results: The conversion rate to open IL was higher in L-VEIL compared with VEIL group (2% vs. 0%). Significantly lesser blood loss was reported with L-VEIL compared with VEIL (mean difference: 3.63 mL; P = .01). Postoperative drain duration was significantly lower with L-VEIL (-4.34 days; P < .05) than VEIL. The L-VEIL group had a higher number of lymph nodes without infiltration (mean difference: -0.48; P = .02). Operative time, nodal yield, nodal positivity, and hospitalization duration were similar in both groups. Postoperative complications were higher in the L-VEIL versus VEIL group (35 vs. 11 cases). Lymphedema events were significantly higher with L-VEIL in comparison with VEIL (38.8% vs. 16.7%; P = .03). Among patients with penile cancer, no significant difference was observed in outcomes obtained with VEIL and L-VEIL. Conclusion: As L-VEIL and VEIL approaches lead to comparable surgical outcomes, surgeons may choose either of these as per their convenience.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic antegrade versus open inguinal lymphadenectomy: a retrospective controlled study

BackgroundTo investigate the surgical methods and clinical results of robot-assisted laparoscopic antegrade inguinal lymphadenectomy.MethodsA retrospective study was performed on clinical data from 19 patients with penile cancer admitted from March 2013 to October 2017. Among them, nine patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic antegrade inguinal lymphadenectomy (robot-assisted group) and 10 patients underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (open group). In the robot-assisted group, preoperative preparation, patient position, robot placement, design of operating channel and establishment of operating space are described. Key surgical procedures and techniques are also summarized. In addition, the number of lymph nodes removed, postoperative complications and follow-up in both groups were statistically analyzed.ResultsFor the 9 patients in the robot-assisted group, surgery was successfully accomplished at 17 sides without intraoperative conversion to open surgery. The surgery time for each side was 45~90 min using laparoscope with an average of 68.5 ± 13.69 min/side. The intraoperative blood loss was estimated to be < 10 ml/side, and the number of removed lymph nodes was not significantly different from that of the open group (12 ± 4.2/side vs.11 ± 5.8/side, P = 0.84). There were no postoperative complications such as skin necrosis, delayed wound healing and cellulitis in the robot-assisted group. Skin-related complications occurred in 9 (45%) of the 20 sides in the open group. During a median follow-up of 25 months in robot-assisted group and 52.5 mouths in open group, was not significantly different there were no statistical differences in recurrence-free survival between the groups (75% vs 60%, p = 0.536).ConclusionRobot-assisted laparoscopic antegrade inguinal lymphadenectomy achieved the desired surgical outcomes with fewer intraoperative and postoperative complications. The robotic arms of the surgical system were placed between the lower limbs of each patient. There was no need to re-position the robotic arms during bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy. This simplified the procedure and reduced the use of trocars. If necessary, pelvic lymphadenectomy could be performed simultaneously using the original trocar position.

Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer in China: a systematic review

Background: To evaluate the effect between video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL) for penile cancer to provide the evidence-based basis for the selection of the clinical therapy schemes.&#x0D; Methods: The related clinical controlled trial literatures on the effective comparison of VEIL and OIL were retrieved from the databases of CNKI and Wanfang database. The screening was independently performed by reviewer according to the including and excluding criteria. The related data were extracted and the meta-analysis performed by the RevMan 5.3 software.&#x0D; Results: A total of 9 trials were included. There were 335 cases of inguinal lymphadenectomies, in which 151 cases were VEIL and 184 cases were OIL. The meta-analysis results showed that there were no statistical differences between the two types of operations in terms of the operative time (WMD=28.74, 95% CI-4.12~61.60, P=0.09), but the difference between VEIL and OIL in term of intra-operative blood loss (WMD=-29.24, 95% CI–55.24~- 22.89, P&lt;0.01), postoperative hospital stays (WMD=-3.43, 95%CI–5.07~-1.80, P&lt;0.01), postoperative drainage time (WMD=-3.81, 95%CI–5.38~-2.23, P&lt;0.01), surgical complications (Number of sides OR=0.53, 95% CI0.34~0.81, P&lt;0.01; Number of cases OR=0.36, 95% CI0.24~0.54, P&lt;0.01).&#x0D; Conclusion: VEIL has approximately the same time of operation to OIL, but has less intra-operative blood loss, hospital stay, postoperative drainage time and surgical complications.

Radical Videoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomies: A Matched Pair Analysis.

To evaluate the modifications and feasibility of radical videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VIL). From January 2010 to December 2017, more than 200 patients who have underwent bilateral radical inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer in Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center. And there were 33 patients who received radical VIL and 174 patients who received open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL). According to similar factors of age, body mass index, T stage, and N stage, two matched groups were created with a rate of 1:2, one group received VIL, and another group received OIL. The numbers of harvested lymph nodes, operating times, and complications were compared between the two groups. Descriptive statistical analyses, t tests, chi-square tests, and rank sum tests were performed. In total, 93 patients were selected, including 31 patients who underwent bilateral VIL and 62 who underwent OIL. The numbers of harvested lymph nodes did not differ significantly (p = 0.983), the operating time was longer for the VIL than the open lymphadenectomy (p < 0.01), and the morbidity was lower among the VIL than the open lymphadenectomy. Modified radical VIL is feasible, practical, and results in reduced morbidity. The dissecting field and the defined plane were critical to these modifications.

Endoscopy-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer.

To explore the feasibility and efficiency of video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) for vulvar cancer. We evaluated 46 patients with vulvar cancer. Treatment included VEIL using the hypogastric subcutaneous approach (VEIL-H, 17 patients), VEIL with thelimb subcutaneous surgical approach (VEIL-L, 8 patients), and open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL, 21 patients). All patients underwentradical vulvectomy; we evaluated operative time, the amount of bleeding, SF score, recurrence rate, etc. RESULTS: The durations of VEIL-H and VEIL-L were 170.79 ± 18.92 and 180.12 ± 17.88min, respectively, which were longer than that of OIL (100.68 ± 11.37min; P = 0.028). Bleeding volumes in the VEIL-H and VEIL-L groups were 15.23 ± 2.17 and 17.16 ± 2.35ml, respectively; there were significantly lower than that of the OIL group (36.68 ± 3.48ml; P = 0.021). The numbers of unilateral lymph nodes harvested were similar in all groups. The duration of hospitalization in VEIL group was shorter than that of the OIL group. There were less skin and lymphatic complications after VEIL than after OIL. Total SF-36 scores were significantly higher in the VEIL group than that in the OIL group (P = 0.032). There were no statistically significant differences in local recurrence, distant metastasis, and mortality among the three groups. VEIL for vulvar cancer treatment is effective, with the advantages of short hospitalization stay, less bleeding, and reduced postoperative complications comparing the OIL.

Effect of blue dye guided lymph channel ligation on the surgical morbidity of groin lymphadenectomy for vulval cancer: a feasibility study

Inguinal lymphadenectomy has significant morbidity. Blue dye-guided lymph channel ligation is an effective technique for resolving lymphocele. This was a feasibility study in a preventative setting. Patients with vulval cancer requiring bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy were recruited. After lymphadenectomy, patent blue V dye was injected and the severed lymph channels leaking blue dye, on the randomly-designated side were ligated. The median age was 72.5 years and the median body mass index was 25. The median lymph node harvest was 18.5. There were no significant surgical procedural differences between the right and the left sides. There was no significant difference between the two arms in terms of the duration or the volume of drainage and post-operative complications. All patients were alive at the follow-up period of 40.5 months. In this feasibility study, blue dye-guided lymph channel ligation did not significantly impact on post-operative outcomes.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Lymph channel ligation with blue dye-guidance is an effective strategy for managing recalcitrant inguinal lymphocyst. This strategy was prospectively-studied in a small series of patients with non-gynaecological cancers. This particular study by Nakamura et al. (2011) revealed that such a strategy might be efficacious in reducing wound drain output.What do the results of this study add? Our study is the first study to assess this technique exclusively in vulval cancer. Blue dye-guided lymph channel ligation at the time of inguinal lymphadenectomy does not appear to reduce wound drainage. However, this study suggests that primary lymphocyst predominantly results from inflammatory exudates, whereas persistent secondary lymphocysts are likely to result from lymphorrhoea.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Future studies, which aim to reduce the morbidity of open inguinal lymphadenectomy, should employ a composite strategy to reduce inflammatory secretions. In addition, a biochemical and cytological analysis on lymphocysts at various time points should be performed to characterise the natural history of groin lymphocysts.

Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy vs Open Inguinal Lymphadenectomy for Carcinoma Penis: Expanding Role and Comparison of Outcomes

To compare differences of morbidity profile, oncological yield, and efficacy between video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy cases. A total of 29 patients with proven squamous cell carcinoma of the penis were selected for inguinal lymphadenectomy from August 2013 to January 2017. Video endoscopic lymphadenectomy was performed on 1 limb and open inguinal lymphadenectomy was performed on the contralateral side. Relevant outcome data such as operative time, complication rate, number of lymph nodes removed, number of positive nodes, and recurrence during the follow-up period were collected, analyzed, and compared. The mean operative time was significantly longer for the video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy group (mean = 162.83 minutes) as compared with the open group (mean = 92.35 minutes). However, the mean numbers of lymph nodes removed were 7.6 in the endoscopic group and 8.3 in the open group. Postoperative complications occurred in 10 limbs (34.48%) in the open group and in 3 limbs (10.34%) in the endoscopic group. In the follow-up period ranging from 7 to 28 (mean 14) months, 2 patients died because of either distant or visceral metastasis. The present study clearly outlines the fact that video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy can deliver an equivalent lymph node yield similar to open inguinal lymphadenectomy with significantly less morbidity and is not affected by either the palpability or the number of palpable nodes. Thus, we believe that this minimally invasive technique can provide a prudent alternative for the management of the inguinal region in carcinoma of the penis.

9 - A Comparative Study of Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy and Conventional Open Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Treating Vulvar Cancer

9 - A Comparative Study of Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy and Conventional Open Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Treating Vulvar Cancer

A Minimally Invasive Approach for Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Melanoma and Genitourinary Malignancy: Long-Term Outcomes in an Attempted Randomized Control Trial.

Open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL) has a high incidence of complications. The authors adapted and reported a minimally invasive technique [videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VIL)] for use with melanoma, subsequently pursuing a randomized, prospective trial comparing open and minimally invasive approaches in an attempt to confirm retrospective findings illustrating reduced complications with the minimally invasive approach. A randomized, prospective trial (NCT01526486) was designed to compare outcomes for patients undergoing VIL versus OIL. Patients with a diagnosis of malignancies requiring inguinal lymphadenectomy at Emory University were enrolled in the study, and informed consent was obtained. Failure to accrue sufficient patients resulted in suspension of the randomization process. Clinicopathologic, procedural, and outcomes data on VILs were prospectively collected. The primary outcome was wound complications, and the secondary outcome was recurrence-free survival. The results are limited to VILs. In this study, 102 patients underwent 137 procedures. Most of the complications were Clavien-Dindo 1 or 2, accounting for 89.7% of all postoperative issues. The wound infection rate was 47.4%. Skin necrosis or wound dehiscence occurred after 13 of the procedures (9.5%). For the patients with melanoma, the median overall survival was 68.8months, and the recurrence-free survival was 18.5months. The median inguinal recurrence-free survival was not reached. The median stage-specific recurrence-free survival was not reached for stage IIIA, was 22.8months for stage IIIB, and was 8.8months for stage IIIC disease (p<0.001). The long-term findings presented in this report expand on and confirm previously published results demonstrating decreased morbidity and oncologic noninferiority of VIL, further validating the technique for patients requiring lymphadenectomy.

Robotic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: the why, how, and what.

Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (SCC-P) demonstrates a reliable pattern of spread to the lymph nodes of the groin. High grade and higher stage (pT1b or greater) SCC-P demonstrate a higher propensity for metastasis to the inguinal lymph nodes. Further, lymphadenopathy progresses in a predictable fashion, from superficial inguinal lymph nodes to deep inguinal lymph nodes to pelvic lymph nodes, with limited survival noted for those patients with progression to pelvic lymph nodes. Fortunately, inguinal lymphadenectomy can provide cure and improvement in RFS for SCC-P. Unfortunately open inguinal lymphadenectomy is associated with significant morbidity. Perhaps owing to this morbidity, inguinal lymphadenectomy is underperformed in the US. In other words, urologists only offer inguinal lymphadenectomy for high risk SCC-P in only a minority of cases and even when performed, lymph node yield is often unsatisfactory (less than 8 nodes per groin). Recently, a laparoendoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy has been developed as a new approach to offer potentially curative lymph node resection while minimizing morbidity. The robotic platform has since been adapted for this approach and several reports demonstrate significant improvements in morbidity while maintaining oncologic equivalency. This review highlights the rationale for inguinal lymphadenectomy, inguinal lymph node anatomy, and technical considerations and outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic inguinal lymphadenectomy.

The video endoscopy inguinal lymphadenectomy for vulvar cancer: A pilot study

ObjectiveThis prospective pilot study aims to validate feasibility, efficacy and safeness of the innovative technique of video endoscopy inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and compare it to open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL) in the staging and treatment of vulvar cancer (VC). Material and methodsAll patients affected by VC suitable for bilateral inguinal-femoral lymphadenectomy were prospectively enrolled and submitted to VEIL on one side and OIL contralaterally, sparing the saphenous vein.The surgical and post-surgical data were collected. Univariate analysis included chi square analysis or Fisher's exact test, when appropriate for categorical variables, and the Student t test and Mann–Whitney test when appropriate for continuous variables. ResultsBetween October 2014 and June 2015 fifteen patients were valuable for the study. Although nodal retrieval was comparable for both procedures, operative time was higher after VEIL. No intraoperative complications were observed in both techniques. Postoperative complications were observed in 3 and 2 cases for OIL and VEIL respectively. One patient needed reoperation after OIL for wound necrosis and infection. According to Campisi's stage, lymphedema resulted significantly to be lower after VEIL (p = 0.024). ConclusionsWaiting for larger series and longer follow-up data, the VEIL seems to be feasible allowing a radical removal of inguinal lymph nodes as well as OIL with lower morbidity.

Comparison of efficiency of laparoscopic and open inguinal lymphadenectomy

Objective To compare the efficiency and complications of laparoscopic and open inguinal lymphadenectomy. Method Nineteen patients underwent one side inguinal lymphadenectomy were collected for the study from September 2014 to September 2015. The patients' average age was 55.2 years (ranging 38 to 69 years). Nine patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 10 patients underwent open surgery. Operation time, hemorrhage, complications, hospital stay, and wound healing time were compared between the two groups. Result Surgical time[(151.11±33.27)min vs. (156.81±42.14)min], number of lymph node resected[(7.00±2.60) vs. (11.73±6.10)], and hospital stay[(8.63±1.41) d vs. (9.69±2.39)d] showed no statistic difference between laparoscopic surgery group and open surgery group(P>0.05). However, hemorrhage[(29.44±17.40)ml vs. (57.73±26.96)ml], drainage time[(7.33±2.06)d vs. (12.18±2.71)d], Clevien gradeⅡcomplications (0 vs. 30%), and wound healing time[(7.33±1.12)vs. (12.45±2.30)]were significantly reduced in laparoscopic surgery group compared with open surgery group(P<0.05). Conclusions Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery could achieve the same efficiency, and had the advantage of reduction of complications, wound healing time as well as in-surgery hemorrhage. Key words: lymphadenectomy; Laparoscopic surgery; Complications

Molecular markers in penile cancer

In Europe and North America penile cancer is a rare disease, with an incidence of approximately 1.5 per 100,000 males, although this increases to 4.4 per 100,000 men in South America and Africa. Penile cancer represents a significant global health problem due to the often devastating consequences of treatment at this site of malignancy, and the mortality associated with metastatic disease. The primary lymphatic drainage of penile cancer is to the inguinal lymph nodes, and the presence of metastatic disease within the inguinal lymph nodes is the most important prognostic factor. The 5-year survival for men with lymph node metastasis is 57%, compared with 90% for those without. Of those patients who present with clinically node negative (cN0) disease, 20%-25% will have occult metastases. Therefore if all patients with ZT1G2 disease undergo inguinal lymphadenectomy, potential overtreatment will occur in 75%-80% of cases where the inguinal lymph nodes are pathologically clear. Furthermore, open inguinal lymphadenectomy is associated with significant morbidity, with up to 70% of patients developing complications related to wound healing, or long-term genital or lower limb lymphoedema. Therefore, there is a clear clinical need to accurately predict the presence of lymph node micro-metastasis and to determine prognosis so as to select only those patients who would benefit from radical inguinal lymphadenectomy. This information would be invaluable when discussing and determining the extent of surgical resections and further treatment required. This review will evaluate the evidence for the use of molecular biomarkers to predict lymph node status as well as prognosis in penile carcinoma. It will also discuss the next generation of biomarkers, which have the potential to change the diagnostic landscape in penile cancer. The pathways and logic behind biomarkers that have been studied thus far will also be considered.

[Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy via hypogastric/limb subcutaneous approach for early-stage vulvar cancer].

To describe and compare video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy via hypogastric and limb approach (VEIL-H vs VEIL-L) in patients with invasive vulvar cancer. From March 2011 to August 2013, 7 women with early-stage vulvar cancer were selected for this integrated procedure with a combination of VEIL-H and VEIL-L in bilateral groins.VEIL-L was performed on limb with old surgical scar in ipsilateral hypogastric area of 3 patients and VEIL-H in contralateral limb. Both novel procedures were performed with triple trocars respectively. The boundaries of inguinal lymph node dissection were the same template of open inguinal lymphadenectomy. Preoperative data, surgical techniques and follow-up outcomes were compared.Standard statistical tests were used. The combination of VEIL-H and VEIL-L was successfully completed in 7 patients without conversion into open surgery. The great saphenous vein was spared in 13 limbs.No difference existed in mean operative duration, average blood loss volume and median total regional lymph nodes removed in two groups. All nodes were confirmed tumor-free. Mean drain duration was (4.7 ± 1.4) days in the VEIL-H group and (2.7 ± 0.9) days in VEIL-L group respectively (P < 0.01). Mean drain volume was (123 ± 55) ml in VEIL-H group and (62 ± 32) ml respectively (P < 0.05). Mean postoperative hospital stay was (8.6 ± 2.2) days.No major intraoperative complications occurred. However, hypercarbia in one patient 1 was completely reversible with hyperventilation.Unilateral great saphenous vein was injured in another one.Regarding postoperative complications, one patient suffered lymphocele in VEIL-H side and another had lymphorrhea through drain orifice in VEIL-L side. During a follow-up period of (19 ± 7) months, there was no disease recurrence so far. The combination of VEIL-H and VEIL-L has the reproducibility and therapeutic potentials in the treatment for patients with vulvar cancer. Both minimal invasive techniques are viable. Although short-term results are encouraging, larger series with a longer follow-up are required to fully evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of VEIL-H and VEIL-L.

Oncologic Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Videoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy for Metastatic Melanoma

Open inguinal lymphadenectomy for regionally metastatic melanoma is associated with a high wound-related morbidity. Videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VIL) is a minimally invasive approach with fewer wound-related complications, yet its adoption has been hindered by a lack of oncologic outcomes data. Data were prospectively collected on all VILs performed for melanoma from 2008 to 2012 (n = 40) and compared with a retrospective cohort of open superficial inguinal lymphadenectomies from 2005 to 2012 (n = 40). Continuous variables were analyzed with Student's t-test, binomial variables with chi-square, and survival curves using log-rank comparison. Median follow-up for patients undergoing VIL was 19.1 months compared with 33.9 months in the open inguinal lymphadenectomy group. There were no statistical differences in demographics (age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, Charlson comorbidity index) or clinicopathologic features (primary site, stage, Breslow depth, ulceration). Lymph node yield was similar (VIL, 12.6; open, 14.2; p = 0.131). Overall recurrence rates were also similar: 27.5% in the VIL group and 30.0% in the open group (p = 0.805). One patient in the VIL group and 2 in the open group suffered recurrence in the nodal basin. Although median survival was not reached in the VIL group, Kaplan-Meier estimates of disease-free survival (p = 0.226) and overall survival (p = 0.308) were similar. In a comprehensive analysis of wound complications including infection, skin necrosis, and seroma, patients undergoing VIL had markedly less morbidity (VIL, 47.5%; open, 80.0%; p = 0.002). Videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy is associated with similar oncologic outcomes and markedly reduced wound complications when compared with open inguinal lymphadenectomy. The minimally invasive procedure may be the preferred method for inguinal lymphadenectomy in melanoma.

Expanded criteria for Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) in penile cancer: palpable lymph nodes

Open inguinal lymphadenectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of inguinal metastasis in patients with penile cancer (PC). Recently the Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) was proposed as an option to reduce the morbidity of the procedure in patients without palpable inguinal lymph nodes (PILN), however the oncological equivalency in patients with PILN remains poorly studied. The aims of this video are the demonstration of VEIL in patients with PILN and present the preliminary experience comparing patients with and without PILN. The video illustrates the procedure performed in two cases that were previously underwent partial penectomy for PC with PILN. Data from the series of 15 patients (22 limbs operated) with PILN underwent VEIL were compared with our series of VEIL in 25 clinically N0 patients (35 limbs operated). The comparison between the groups with and without PILN found, respectively, these outcomes: age 52,45 x 53,2 years, operative time 126,8 x 95,5 minutes, hospital stay 5. x 3.1 days, drainage time 6.7 x 5.7 days, 9 resected lymph nodes on average in both groups, global complications 32% x 26%, cellulitis 4.5% x 0%, lymphocele 23% in both groups, skin necrosis 0% x 3%, myocutaneous necrosis 4.5% x 0%, pN+ 33% x 32 %, cancer specific mortality 7 % x 5 % and mean follow-up 17.3 x 35.3 months. None of the variables presented p < 0.05. VEIL is a safe complementary procedure for treatment of PC, even in patients with PILN. Oncological results in patients with PILN seem to be appropriate but are still very premature. Prospective multicenter studies with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be conducted to determine the oncological equivalence of VEIL compared with open surgery in patients with PILN.