Entrar/Registro  
HOME SPANISH
 
Ginecología y Obstetricia de México
   
MENU

Contents by Year, Volume and Issue

Table of Contents

General Information

Instructions for Authors

Message to Editor

Editorial Board






>Journals >Ginecología y Obstetricia de México >Year 2018, Issue 07


Valdespino-Castillo VE, Maytorena-Córdova G, Valdespino-Gómez VM, Olguín-Cruces V, Zeferino-Torquero M, Blas-Hernández P
Retroperitoneal nodal dissection in gynecological cancer: utility as a predictive biomarker
Ginecol Obstet Mex 2018; 86 (07)

Language: Español
References: 31
Page: 464-477
PDF: 325.70 Kb.


Full text




ABSTRACT

Background: Retroperitoneal and pelvic lymphadenectomy is part of the surgical process staging of endometrial and ovarian cancer. The stage assignment and treatment of patients with cervical cancer is clinical; with radiotherapy and chemotherapy concomitant, without knowing prognostic factors of the local disease, neither status of pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph node disease. In gynecological cancer the systematic pathological evaluation of the retroperitoneal ganglia is decisive for stablished the stage (in ovarian and endometrial) but in cervical cancer has less approval in international treatment guidelines and there are fewer studies solids that are in favor of staging lymphadenectomy.
Objective: To review the topic and demonstrate the relevance and advantages of staging retroperitoneal ganglionar in the different gynecological malignancies.
Method: The bibliography was revised in the PubMed database with search of key words: lymphadenectomy in gynecological cancer and lymph node metastases retroperitoneal in gynecological cancer.
Results: 71 articles were finded with information on the study variables. At the time of its analysis only documents with study information were included randomized, and with information that included endometrial cancer, ovary or cervix, covered 31 articles for analysis.
Conclusions: In addition to the review of articles, a proposal is presented to evaluate retroperitoneal metastases and their future usefulness as a biomarker. With the exposed literature and our proposed retroperitoneal lymph node evaluation is it favors the staging of gynecological cancer (endometrium, ovary and cervix).


Key words: Retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy, Endometrial cancer, Ovarian cancer, Cervical cancer, Lymph node metastasis.


REFERENCIAS

  1. Paik ES, Shim M, Choi HJ, Lee YY, Kim TJ, Lee JW, Kim BG, Bae DS, Choi CH. Impact of lymphadenectomy on survival after recurrence in patients with advanced ovarian cancer without suspected lymph node metastasis.Gynecol Oncol. 2016;143(2):252-257.

  2. Oldenburg J, Alfsen GC, Lien HH, Aass N, Waehre H, Fossa SD. Postchemotherapy retroperitoneal surgery remains necessary in patients with nonseminomatous testicular cancer and minimal residual tumor masses. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(17):3310-3317.

  3. Zhou J, Chen QH, Wu SG, He ZY, Sun JY, Li FY, Lin HX, You KL. Lymph node ratio may predict the benefit of postoperative radiotherapy in node-positive cervical cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7:29420-29428.

  4. Todo Y, Kato H, Kaneuchi M, et al. Survival effect of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (SEPAL study): a retrospective cohort analysis. Lancet 2010;375:1165-1172.

  5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Ovarian Cancer Including Fallopian Tube Cancer and Primary Peritoneal Cancer. Version I.2016.

  6. Camilien L, Gordon D, Fruchter RG, Maiman M, Boyce JG. Predictive value of computerized tomography in the presurgical evaluation of primary carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 1988;30:209–215.

  7. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1995;86(1):43–50.

  8. Vandeperre A, Van Limbergen E, Leunen K, Moerman P, Amant F, Vergote I. Para-aortic lymph node metastases in locally advanced cervical cancer: Comparison between surgical staging and imaging.Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138:299-303.

  9. Panici PB, Maggioni A, Hacker N, Landoni F, Ackermann S, Campagnutta E, et al. Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:560–566.

  10. Martín CM, Delgado ES, Piñera A, Maria ,Diestro D, De Santiago J, Zapardiel I. The role of surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cáncer. Ecancermedicalscience. 2016; 10: 666.

  11. Wright JD, Shah M, Mathew L, Burke WM, Culhane J, Goldman N, Schiff PB, Herzog TJ. Fertility preservation in young women with epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer. 2009;115:4118-4126.

  12. Mikami M. Role of lymphadenectomy for ovarian cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2014;25:279–281

  13. Berek JS. Lymph node-positive stage IIIC ovarian cancer: a separate entity? Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:S18-S20.

  14. Fotopoulou C, El-Balat A, du Bois A, Sehouli J, Harter P, Muallem MZ, Krätschell RW, Traut A, Heitz F. Systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in early high-risk or advanced endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;292:1321-1327.

  15. AlHilli MM, Mariani A. The role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2013;18:193-199.

  16. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Pelvic lymph node F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake as a prognostic biomarker in newly diagnosed patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cancer. 2010;116:1469-75.

  17. Wright JD, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Mutch DG, Huettner PC, Rader JS, Gibb RK, Powell MA, Gao F, Siegel BA, Grigsby PW. Preoperative lymph node staging of early-stage cervical carcinoma by [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2005;104:2484-2491.

  18. Frumovitz M, Querleu D, Gil-Moreno A, , Morice P, Jhingran A, Munsell M, BS, Macapinlac H, LeBlanc E, Martinez A, Ramirez P. Lymphadenectomy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer Study (LiLACS): A phase III clinical trial comparing surgical to radiologic staging in patients with stages IB2-IVA cervical cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 ; 21: 3–8. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2013.07.007.

  19. Vandeperre A, Van Limbergen E, Leunen K, Moerman P, Amant F, Vergote I. Para-aortic lymph node metastases in locally advanced cervical cancer: Comparison between surgical staging and imaging. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138(2):299-303.

  20. Kimmig R, Wimberger P, Buderath P, Aktas B, Iannaccone A, Heubner M. Definition of compartment-based radical surgery in uterine cancer: radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer as 'total mesometrial resection (TMMR)' by M Höckel translated to robotic surgery (rTMMR). World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11:211.

  21. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Endometrial Cancer. Version .2016.

  22. Zand B, Euscher ED, Soliman PT, Schmeler KM, Coleman RL, Frumovitz M, Jhingran A, Ramondetta LM, Ramirez PT. Rate of para-aortic lymph node micrometastasis in patients with locally advanced cervical cáncer. Gynecol Oncol. 2010; 119: 422–425.

  23. Fregnani JH, Latorre MR, Novik PR, Lopes A, Soares FA.. Assessment of pelvic lymph node micrometastatic disease in stages IB and IIA carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16:1188–1194.

  24. Querleu D, Morrow P. Clasification of radical hysterectomy. Lancet Oncology 2008; 9: 297-303.

  25. Kyrgiou M, Swart AM, Qian W, Warwick J. A Comparison of Outcomes Following Laparoscopic and Open Hysterectomy With or Without Lymphadenectomy for Presumed Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: Results From the Medical Research Council ASTEC Trial.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015; 25:1424-1436.

  26. Köhler C, Tozzi R, Klemm P, Schneider A. Laparoscopic paraaortic left-sided transperitoneal infrarenal lymphadenectomy in patients with gynecologic malignancies: technique and results. Gynecol Oncol. 2003: 91;139–148.

  27. Köhler C, Klemm P, Schau A, Possover M, Krause N, Tozzi R, Schneider A. Introduction of transperitoneal lymphadenectomy in a gynecologic oncology center: analysis of 650 laparoscopic pelvic and/or paraaortic transperitoneal lymphadenectomies. Gynecolo Oncol. 2004:95: 52–61.

  28. Brockbank E, Kokka F, Bryant A, Pomel C, Reynolds K. Pretreatment surgical para-aortic lymph node assessment in locally advanced cervical cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 28;(3):CD008217. doi: 10.1002/14651858. CD008217

  29. Gouy S, Morice P, Narducci F, Uzan C, Martinez A, Rey A, Bentivegna E, Pautier P, Deandreis D, Querleu D, Haie-Meder C, Leblanc E. Prospective multicenter study evaluating the survival of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing laparoscopic para-aortic lymphadenectomy before chemoradiotherapy in the era of positron emission tomography imaging. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 3026–3033.

  30. C. Marth, F. Landoni, S. Mahner, M. McCormack, A. Gonzalez-Martin, N. Colombo, on behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Committee. Cervical cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology 2017: 28; (Supplement 4): iv72–iv83.

  31. Prontuario de actualización fiscal. Costos Unitarios por Nivel de Atención Médica que regirán para el ejercicio. IMSS. 2017.






>Journals >Ginecología y Obstetricia de México >Year 2018, Issue 07
 

· Journal Index 
· Links 






       
Copyright 2019