The Outcome of Post-Chemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer in the Retroperitoneum. Academic Article uri icon

Overview

abstract

  • Purpose: While a definitive cure can be achieved by radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in select patients with regional lymphadenopathy, the benefit remains uncertain in patients who present with non-regional metastases. We analyzed the survival outcomes of post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Materials and Methods: We reviewed our institutional database and identified 13 patients with radiographically evident or biopsy proven retroperitoneal nodal metastases with a significant response to chemotherapy. These patients underwent consolidative surgery with concomitant or delayed retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival and disease-specific survival from the time of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Results: All patients had primary urothelial cell carcinoma. Twelve patients underwent concomitant radical cystectomy, pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Seven patients (54%) had residual disease in the retroperitoneum and the median number of retroperitoneal nodes containing metastases was 4 (IQR 2-6). Six (86%) developed disease recurrences within 2 years of surgery and 5 (71%) died of cancer. Of the 6 patients without residual disease in the retroperitoneum, 2 (33%) developed recurrences and died of disease progression. The 2-year disease-specific survival was worse for patients with residual disease in the retroperitoneum than those without residual retroperitoneal disease (34%, 95% CI 5-68 vs 50%, 95% CI 6-85). Conclusions: The presence of retroperitoneal nodal metastases at post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is a poor prognosticator. Consolidative surgery with retroperitoneal lymph node dissection provides important prognostic information and may be therapeutic in a very small subset of these patients.

publication date

  • January 31, 2019

Identity

PubMed Central ID

  • PMC6401561

Scopus Document Identifier

  • 85061065195

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.3233/BLC-180186

PubMed ID

  • 30854412

Additional Document Info

volume

  • 5

issue

  • 1