Saphenous-sparing Ascending Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection Using a Leg Approach: Surgical Technique and Perioperative and Pathological Outcomes
Background: Open inguinal lymph node dissection (oILND) has high morbidity. Ascending saphenous-sparing video endoscopic ILND (VEILND-AS+) represents a minimally invasive alternative with potential benefits. Objective: To describe our VEILND-AS+ technique and compare outcomes to oILND. Design, setti...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/cec54a7a3134479f8622f88d461273bf |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Background: Open inguinal lymph node dissection (oILND) has high morbidity. Ascending saphenous-sparing video endoscopic ILND (VEILND-AS+) represents a minimally invasive alternative with potential benefits. Objective: To describe our VEILND-AS+ technique and compare outcomes to oILND. Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of penile cancer patients. Surgical procedure: VEILND-AS+ was performed according to the technique described in the supplementary video. Measurements: We compared perioperative and pathological outcomes between the two procedures. Results and limitations: In the study cohort of 206 men we performed 40 VEILND-AS+ and 251 oILND procedures. In comparison to oILND, VEILND-AS+ had a longer operation time (185 vs 120 min; p < 0.01) but a shorter hospital stay (2 vs 4 d; p < 0.01). A median of eight resected lymph nodes with a median of one affected node per groin was observed in both groups. Extranodal extension was found in 30% of cases after VEILND-AS+ and 35% after oILND. In both groups the median drainage time was 13 d. Wound infections were observed in 38% of cases after VEILND-AS+ and 27% after oILND (p = 0.19). Skin necrosis or wound breakdown occurred in 0% and 6% of cases after VEILND-AS+ and oILND (p < 0.01), while lymphoceles were drained in 18% and 7% of cases, respectively(p = 0.03). Following VEILND-AS+ and oILND, 20% and 14% of patients, respectively, were referred to a lymph oedema clinic (p < 0.01). Conclusions: VEILND-AS+ is a safe procedure and offers shorter hospital stays and possibly a lower risk of skin necrosis and wound breakdown in comparison to oILND. Further improvements in the VEILND-AS+ technique are required to reduce complications associated with dead space and injury to lymphatic vessels. Patient summary: For patients undergoing surgery on lymph nodes in the groin, a minimally invasive approach instead of open surgery led to discharge 2 days earlier and may have lower rates of severe wound complications. |
|---|