Introduction: The rationale for lymphadenectomy in primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) is unclear. We sought to define the pattern of lymphatic metastasis in PPC and propose evidence-based rationale for lymphadenectomy in relevant cases. Methods: Patients with PPC undergoing primary surgery at Mayo Clinic were identified. Demographics, tumor characteristics, procedures performed and follow up were analyzed. Results: Forty eight patients with PPC were identified; 39 had stage IIIC (81.2%) and 9 (18.8%) had stage IV. Residual disease (RD) after primary surgery was microscopic in 6 cases (12.5%), less than 1 cm in 33 (68.8%), more than 1 cm in 9 patient (18.7%) with median survivals of 5.8, 3.2 and 1.3 years, respectively. Overall, 24 patients had lymphadenectomy performed (pelvic (PND) or paraortic (PAND) or both). Pelvic nodes were involved in 12/23 (52.7%) cases, while para-aortic nodes were involved in 5/21 (23.8%) of cases. The rate of simultaneously positive pelvic and para-aortic nodes was 20% (4/20). Nodal involvement was a poor prognostic factor with 5 year overall survival 63% vs. 25% (p = 0.014) in node positive vs. negative cases. Compared to patients with primary ovarian cancer (OC), OC cases had a higher rate of positive para-aortic nodes (57.6%: 77/132; p = 0.004). Conclusions: Retroperitoneal lymph nodes are a common site of metastases in PPC, therefore it is logically consistent to perform PND and PAND if a patient can be cytoreduced to microscopic RD in other sites or remove grossly positive nodes in patients with RD < 1 cm.

Pattern of retroperitoneal dissemination of primary peritoneum cancer: Basis for rational use of lymphadenectomy / G.D. Aletti, C. Powless, J. Bakkum-Gamez, T.O. Wilson, K.C. Podratz, W.A. Cliby. - In: GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 0090-8258. - 114:1(2009), pp. 32-36. [10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.03.020]

Pattern of retroperitoneal dissemination of primary peritoneum cancer: Basis for rational use of lymphadenectomy

G.D. Aletti;
2009

Abstract

Introduction: The rationale for lymphadenectomy in primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) is unclear. We sought to define the pattern of lymphatic metastasis in PPC and propose evidence-based rationale for lymphadenectomy in relevant cases. Methods: Patients with PPC undergoing primary surgery at Mayo Clinic were identified. Demographics, tumor characteristics, procedures performed and follow up were analyzed. Results: Forty eight patients with PPC were identified; 39 had stage IIIC (81.2%) and 9 (18.8%) had stage IV. Residual disease (RD) after primary surgery was microscopic in 6 cases (12.5%), less than 1 cm in 33 (68.8%), more than 1 cm in 9 patient (18.7%) with median survivals of 5.8, 3.2 and 1.3 years, respectively. Overall, 24 patients had lymphadenectomy performed (pelvic (PND) or paraortic (PAND) or both). Pelvic nodes were involved in 12/23 (52.7%) cases, while para-aortic nodes were involved in 5/21 (23.8%) of cases. The rate of simultaneously positive pelvic and para-aortic nodes was 20% (4/20). Nodal involvement was a poor prognostic factor with 5 year overall survival 63% vs. 25% (p = 0.014) in node positive vs. negative cases. Compared to patients with primary ovarian cancer (OC), OC cases had a higher rate of positive para-aortic nodes (57.6%: 77/132; p = 0.004). Conclusions: Retroperitoneal lymph nodes are a common site of metastases in PPC, therefore it is logically consistent to perform PND and PAND if a patient can be cytoreduced to microscopic RD in other sites or remove grossly positive nodes in patients with RD < 1 cm.
Primary peritoneal carcinoma; Lymphatic dissemination; Lymphadenectomy; Prognosis; Ovarian carcinoma
Settore MED/40 - Ginecologia e Ostetricia
2009
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0090825809001899-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 244.92 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
244.92 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/586477
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 3
  • Scopus 11
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact