Frequency and Consequences of Lymphocele Formation After Extended Lymphdissection in Patients Undergoing Open Retropubic Prostatectomy
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
It is known that any surgery can lead to the risk of development of the late postoperative complication – lymphocele, which can occur in a period from about 2 weeks to 6 months after surgery.
The objective: to analyze the frequency of lymphocele formation and its outcomes after open retropubic prostatectomy (ORP) and extended lymph node dissection (ELND) in patients with localized prostate cancer (PC).
Materials and methods. The study included patients after ORP and ELND who were observed after operation for a period more than 6 months. All operations were performed by the retropubic extraperitoneal access by one surgeon. All patients received low molecular weight heparins to prevent thromboembolic complications. In the postoperative period, patients had control ultrasound examination (USE), the frequency and outcomes of lymphocele were studied retrospectively. If the results of USE were normal, no imaging study was performed for the next 6 months.
Results. The results of treatment of patients with localized PC were analyzed. The mean observe period was 16.2 months. Lymphocele developed in 4% of cases and was symptomatic in 1.5 % of men. In all patients, lymphocele was detected within 1 month after surgery. In 74% of cases, lymphocele regressed within 3 months after surgery according to results of USE.
In 64% of patients with lymphocele more 3 months the symptoms associated with cystic infection that required adequate drainage developed. Patients with diabetes had a higher risk of infected lymphocele development. Other symptoms which were associated with lymphocele have been found rarely. Comparison of preoperative characteristics of the patients with and without lymphocele did not demonstrate reliable prognostic indicators of possible lymphocele formation in a retrospective analysis of these persons.
Conclusions. The risk of the development of symptomatic lymphocele after open retropubic prostatectomy and extended lymph node dissection is quite rare. However, ultrasound examination for 3 months after surgery is considered appropriate.
It is recommended to perform the percutaneous drainage of the pathological cavity under ultrasound control in case of the detection of symptomatic lymphocele, because this procedure is safe and effective.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the first publication of original scientific articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to distribute work with acknowledgment of authorship and first publication in this journal.
References
Mottet N, Cornford P, van der Bergh R.C.N., Briers E, De Santis M, Gillessen S, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. 2021:55.
Bader P, Burkhard FC, Markwalder R, Studer UE. Is a limited lymph node dissection an adequate staging procedure for prostate cancer? J Urol. 2002;168(2):514–8. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)64670-8
Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node metastasis. J Urol. 2002;167(4):1681–6.
Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Bagniewski S, Bergstralh EJ, R Karnes J, et al. Long-term outcome after radical prostatectomy for patients with lymph node positive prostate cancer in the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2007;178 (3 Pt 1):864–71. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.048
Surcel CI, Sooriakumaran P, Briganti A. De Visschere PJL, Futterer JJ, Ghadjar P, et al. Preferences in the management of high-risk prostate cancer among urologists in Europe: results of a web-based survey. BJU Int. 2015;115(4):571–9. doi: 10.1111/bju.12796
Naselli A, Andreatta R, Introini C, Fontana V, Puppo P. Prediction of symptomatic lymphocele after lymph node excision and radical prostatectomy. Urol. 2010;75(3):630–5. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.03.011
Pepper RJ, Pati J, Kaisary AV. The incidence and treatment of lymphocele after radical retropubic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2005;95(6):772–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05398.x
Solberg A, Angelsen A, Bergan U, Haugen OA, Viset T, Klepp O. Frequency of lymphoceles after open and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003;37(3):218–21. doi: 10.1080/00365590310008082
Spring DB, Schroeder D, Babu S, Agee R, Gooding GA. Ultrasonic evaluation of lymphocele formation after staging lymphadenectomy for prostate carcinoma. Radiol. 1981;141(2):479–83. doi: 10.1148/radiology.141.2.7291577
Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Suardi N, Andrea G, Da Pozzo FL, et al. Complications and other surgical outcomes associated with extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2006;50(5):1006–13. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.015
Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR. Incidence of lymphoceles after robotassisted pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int. 2011;108(7):1185–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10094.x
Musch M, Klevecka V, Roggenbuck U, Kroepfl D. Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy in 1,300 patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy between 1993 and 2006. J Urol. 2008;179(3):923–9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.072
Augustin H, Hammerer P, Graefen M. Intraoperative and perioperative morbidity of contemporary radical retropubic prostatectomy in a consecutive series of 1243 patients: results of a single center between 1999 and 2002. Eur Urol. 2003;169:145–8.
Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MS, Chang SS, Smith Jr ER, Wells N, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003;169(1):145–8. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000039647.16278.17
Davis JM, Shah JB, Achim M. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of radical prostatectomy (RP): a video-based illustration of technique, results, and unmet patient selection needs. BJU Int. 2011;108(6 Pt 2):993–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10454.x
Freid RM, Siegel D, Smith AD, Weiss GH. Lymphoceles after laparoscopic pelvic node dissection. Urol. 1998;51(Suppl):131–4. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00074-0
Davis JM, Achim M, Munsell M, Matin S. Effectiveness of postgraduated training for learning extraperitoneal access for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endo Urol. 2011;25(8):1363–9. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0052
Heinzer H, Hammerer P, Graefen M, Huland H. Thromboembolic complication rate radical retropubic prostatectomy. Impact of routine ultrasonography for the detection of pelvic lymphoceles and hematomas. Eur Urol. 1998;33(1):86–90. doi: 10.1159/000019516
Bigg SV, Catalona WJ. Prophylactic mini-dose heparine in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. A prospective trial. Urol. 1992;39(4):86–90. doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(92)90203-9
Schmitges J, Trinh QD, Jonas L, Larbig R, Schlomm T, Karakiewicz PI, et al. Influence of low-molecular weight dosage on red blood cell transfusion, lymphocele rate and drainage duration after open radical prostatectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38(11):1082–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.08.002.
Sieder PR, Rommel FM, Agusta VE, Breslin JA, Harpster LE, Huffnagle HW, et al. Is heparin contraindicated in pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical prostatectomy? J Urol. 1997;158(3 Pt 1):869–71. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199709000-00050
Tomic R, Granfors T, Sjodin JG, Ohberg L. Lymph leakage after staging pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostatic carcinoma with and without heparin prophylaxis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1994;28(3):273–5.
Yuh B, Artibani W, Heidenreich A, Kimm S, Menon M, Novara G, et al. The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection on the management of high-risk prostate cancer: asystematic review. Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):918–27. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.026
Keskin SM, Argun OB, Obek C, Tufek I, Tuna MB, Mourmouris P, et al. The incidence and sequel of lymphocele formation after robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int. 2016;118(1):127–31. doi: 10.1111/bju.13425
Patel VR, Sivaraman A. Current status of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: progress is inevitable. Oncol (Wilistone Park. NY). 2012;26(7):616–9, 622.
Orieveto MA, CoelhoRF. Incidence of lymphoceles after robot-assisted pelvic node dissection. BJU Int. 2011;108(7):1185–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10094.x
