Survivorship Post-Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Metastatic Testicular Cancer: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Gavin G Calpin, Niall J O'Sullivan, Cian Hehir, Arun Z Thomas, Rowan G Casey
{"title":"Survivorship Post-Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Metastatic Testicular Cancer: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Gavin G Calpin, Niall J O'Sullivan, Cian Hehir, Arun Z Thomas, Rowan G Casey","doi":"10.1111/iju.70109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) may be considered after chemotherapy or as primary treatment in patients with metastatic testicular cancer. We aimed to perform a systematic review to analyze outcomes in survivors across the domains of sexual, physical, and psychological function. It is the first systematic review of outcomes of survivorship following RPLND.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes were extracted from studies meeting the inclusion criteria and were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, there were 11 studies included with 1086 patients. Of these, 80.5% had stage 1 disease and 63.1% had nerve-sparing surgery. Clavien-Dindo 1-2 post-operative complications were reported in 14.1% of cases and Clavien-Dindo 3-5 in 4.5%. There was a 7.0% recurrence rate. Sexual impairment including hypospermia, dry ejaculation, and erectile dysfunction was more prevalent among patients who had non-nerve-sparing procedures. Primary robotic surgery was reported to decrease the systemic chemotherapy burden in patients. Physical, emotional, social functioning, and global quality of life were significantly better in minimally invasive surgery compared to open RPLND.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RPLND is a viable treatment approach and may be considered at multidisciplinary discussions for patients with metastatic testicular cancer. Minimally invasive surgery appears to have better sexual, physical, and psychological outcomes compared to open surgery, with low rates of perioperative complications and acceptable early oncologic outcomes. However, these patients may have been carefully selected and, therefore, are more likely to have favorable outcomes. Sexual dysfunction is a possible complication, and patients should be thoroughly counseled about the risks and benefits of RPLND.</p>","PeriodicalId":14323,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.70109","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) may be considered after chemotherapy or as primary treatment in patients with metastatic testicular cancer. We aimed to perform a systematic review to analyze outcomes in survivors across the domains of sexual, physical, and psychological function. It is the first systematic review of outcomes of survivorship following RPLND.

Methods: A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes were extracted from studies meeting the inclusion criteria and were analyzed.

Results: In total, there were 11 studies included with 1086 patients. Of these, 80.5% had stage 1 disease and 63.1% had nerve-sparing surgery. Clavien-Dindo 1-2 post-operative complications were reported in 14.1% of cases and Clavien-Dindo 3-5 in 4.5%. There was a 7.0% recurrence rate. Sexual impairment including hypospermia, dry ejaculation, and erectile dysfunction was more prevalent among patients who had non-nerve-sparing procedures. Primary robotic surgery was reported to decrease the systemic chemotherapy burden in patients. Physical, emotional, social functioning, and global quality of life were significantly better in minimally invasive surgery compared to open RPLND.

Conclusion: RPLND is a viable treatment approach and may be considered at multidisciplinary discussions for patients with metastatic testicular cancer. Minimally invasive surgery appears to have better sexual, physical, and psychological outcomes compared to open surgery, with low rates of perioperative complications and acceptable early oncologic outcomes. However, these patients may have been carefully selected and, therefore, are more likely to have favorable outcomes. Sexual dysfunction is a possible complication, and patients should be thoroughly counseled about the risks and benefits of RPLND.

转移性睾丸癌腹膜后淋巴结清扫后的生存率:一项系统综述。
腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(RPLND)可考虑化疗后或作为转移性睾丸癌患者的主要治疗方法。我们的目的是进行一项系统的回顾,分析幸存者在性、身体和心理功能方面的结果。这是对RPLND术后生存结局的首次系统回顾。方法:按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。从符合纳入标准的研究中提取结果并进行分析。结果:共纳入11项研究,1086例患者。其中80.5%为1期疾病,63.1%为保神经手术。术后并发症Clavien-Dindo 1-2占14.1%,Clavien-Dindo 3-5占4.5%。复发率为7.0%。性障碍包括低精子症、干射精和勃起功能障碍在非神经保留手术的患者中更为普遍。据报道,初次机器人手术可以减轻患者的全身化疗负担。与开放式RPLND相比,微创手术的身体、情绪、社会功能和整体生活质量明显更好。结论:RPLND是一种可行的治疗方法,可在转移性睾丸癌患者的多学科讨论中予以考虑。与开放手术相比,微创手术似乎具有更好的性、生理和心理预后,围手术期并发症发生率低,早期肿瘤预后可接受。然而,这些患者可能是经过精心挑选的,因此更有可能有良好的结果。性功能障碍是一种可能的并发症,患者应充分了解RPLND的风险和益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Urology
International Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
11.50%
发文量
340
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: International Journal of Urology is the official English language journal of the Japanese Urological Association, publishing articles of scientific excellence in urology. Submissions of papers from all countries are considered for publication. All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信