URO ONCO

Welcome, this website is intended for all international healthcare professionals in uro-oncology. By clicking the link below you are declaring and confirming that you are a healthcare professional.

You are here

Assessing the minimum number of lymph nodes needed at radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer

Capitanio U, Suardi N, Shariat SF, Lotan Y, Palapattu GS, Bastian PJ, Gupta A, Vazina A, Schoenberg M, Lerner SP, Sagalowsky AI, Karakiewicz PI.

BJU Int. 2009 May;103(10):1359-62

Abstract


OBJECTIVE
To identify the likelihood of finding one or more positive lymph nodes (LNs) according to the number of LNs removed at radical cystectomy (RC), as the number of LNs removed affects disease progression and survival after RC.
 
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Between 1984 and 2003, 731 assessable patients had RC and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy at three different institutions. ROC curve coordinates were used to determine the probability of identifying one or more positive LNs according to the total number of removed LNs.
 
RESULTS
Of the 731 patients, 174 (23.8%) had LNs metastases. The mean (median, range) number of LNs removed was 18.7 (17, 1-80). The ROC coordinate-based plots of the number of removed LNs and the probability of finding one or more LNs metastases indicated that removing 45 LNs yielded a 90% probability. Conversely, removing either 15 or 25 LNs indicated, respectively, 50% and 75% probability of detecting one or more LNs metastases.
 
CONCLUSIONS
These data indicate that removing 25 LNs might represent the lowest threshold for the extent of lymphadenectomy at RC. Our findings confirm the importance of an extended lymph node dissection.

E-Alert

Subscribe to our E-Alert to keep up to date with the new items in the Resource Centre

Subscribe

URO ONCO is made possible by an unrestricted educational grant from:

The editorial independence of the resource centre is mandatory and recognized by the EAU and Elsevier.

The journal articles, videos and statements published on the resource centre have been selected independently and without influence from Elsevier, European Urology Editors or the sponsor and do not necessarily reflect their opinions or views.