Suhaib Abdulfattah, Julia M Morales, Kayla Meyer, Kathryn Doherty, Yashaswi Parikh, Nicole J Kye, Nora H Broadwell, Raymond Yong, Sameer Mittal, Chester J Koh, Arun K Srinivasan
{"title":"Minimally invasive approach to retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in pediatric paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma: A multi-institutional case series.","authors":"Suhaib Abdulfattah, Julia M Morales, Kayla Meyer, Kathryn Doherty, Yashaswi Parikh, Nicole J Kye, Nora H Broadwell, Raymond Yong, Sameer Mittal, Chester J Koh, Arun K Srinivasan","doi":"10.1016/j.jpurol.2025.08.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is a critical surgical procedure for staging and managing paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) in pediatric patients. While minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches, including laparoscopic (LP) and robot-assisted (RA) techniques, are well-documented in adult populations, their utilization in pediatric patients remains limited. This multi-institutional study evaluates perioperative and long-term outcomes of MIS RPLND compared to open RPLND in children with PT-RMS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on pediatric patients who underwent RPLND for paratesticular RMS between 2012 and 2024. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, operative details, and postoperative outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 16 patients were included in our study (8 MIS and 8 open). The median age of MIS patients was significantly younger (12.6 vs. 15 years, p = 0.03). MIS cases demonstrated shorter operative times (median 436 vs. 590 min, p = 0.03), lower estimated blood loss (35 vs. 200 mL, p = 0.03), and shorter hospital stays (2.5 vs. 6 days, p = 0.01). Lymph node yield was lower in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 26, p = 0.46), but within the COG-recommended range. Both groups had three patients with positive lymph nodes and comparable complication rates. No recurrences were observed in the MIS group over a significantly longer median follow-up period (71.5 vs. 19 months, p = 0.05). Two patients in the open group experienced relapse, including one mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MIS RPLND is a safe and effective surgical option for managing paratesticular RMS in pediatric patients. Wider adoption and further research with larger cohorts are necessary to validate these findings and optimize surgical techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":16747,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2025.08.003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is a critical surgical procedure for staging and managing paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) in pediatric patients. While minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches, including laparoscopic (LP) and robot-assisted (RA) techniques, are well-documented in adult populations, their utilization in pediatric patients remains limited. This multi-institutional study evaluates perioperative and long-term outcomes of MIS RPLND compared to open RPLND in children with PT-RMS.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on pediatric patients who underwent RPLND for paratesticular RMS between 2012 and 2024. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, operative details, and postoperative outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.
Results: A total of 16 patients were included in our study (8 MIS and 8 open). The median age of MIS patients was significantly younger (12.6 vs. 15 years, p = 0.03). MIS cases demonstrated shorter operative times (median 436 vs. 590 min, p = 0.03), lower estimated blood loss (35 vs. 200 mL, p = 0.03), and shorter hospital stays (2.5 vs. 6 days, p = 0.01). Lymph node yield was lower in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 26, p = 0.46), but within the COG-recommended range. Both groups had three patients with positive lymph nodes and comparable complication rates. No recurrences were observed in the MIS group over a significantly longer median follow-up period (71.5 vs. 19 months, p = 0.05). Two patients in the open group experienced relapse, including one mortality.
Conclusion: MIS RPLND is a safe and effective surgical option for managing paratesticular RMS in pediatric patients. Wider adoption and further research with larger cohorts are necessary to validate these findings and optimize surgical techniques.
腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(RPLND)是儿科患者睾丸旁横纹肌肉瘤(RMS)分期和治疗的关键外科手术。虽然微创手术(MIS)方法,包括腹腔镜(LP)和机器人辅助(RA)技术,在成人人群中有很好的记录,但它们在儿科患者中的应用仍然有限。这项多机构研究评估了与开放式RPLND相比,封闭式RPLND在PT-RMS患儿中的围手术期和长期预后。方法:回顾性分析2012年至2024年因睾丸旁RMS接受RPLND治疗的儿童患者。收集的数据包括人口统计学、肿瘤特征、新辅助化疗、手术细节和术后结果。采用描述性统计对数据进行分析。结果:我们的研究共纳入16例患者(8例MIS和8例open)。MIS患者的中位年龄明显年轻化(12.6比15岁,p = 0.03)。MIS病例的手术时间较短(中位数436 vs 590分钟,p = 0.03),估计失血量较低(35 vs 200 mL, p = 0.03),住院时间较短(2.5 vs 6天,p = 0.01)。MIS组的淋巴结生成量较低(中位数13比26,p = 0.46),但在cog推荐的范围内。两组均有3例淋巴结阳性患者,并发症发生率相当。在较长的中位随访期内,MIS组未见复发(71.5 vs 19个月,p = 0.05)。开放组2例复发,1例死亡。结论:MIS RPLND是一种安全有效的治疗儿科患者睾丸旁RMS的手术选择。为了验证这些发现和优化手术技术,更广泛的采用和进一步的研究是必要的。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pediatric Urology publishes submitted research and clinical articles relating to Pediatric Urology which have been accepted after adequate peer review.
It publishes regular articles that have been submitted after invitation, that cover the curriculum of Pediatric Urology, and enable trainee surgeons to attain theoretical competence of the sub-specialty.
It publishes regular reviews of pediatric urological articles appearing in other journals.
It publishes invited review articles by recognised experts on modern or controversial aspects of the sub-specialty.
It enables any affiliated society to advertise society events or information in the journal without charge and will publish abstracts of papers to be read at society meetings.