[Retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in the treatment of testicular germ cell tumors-Is the robot-assisted technique superior to the open surgical approach?]

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Urologie Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-15 DOI:10.1007/s00120-025-02678-3
Markus Angerer, Klaus-Peter Dieckmann, Christian Wülfing
{"title":"[Retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in the treatment of testicular germ cell tumors-Is the robot-assisted technique superior to the open surgical approach?]","authors":"Markus Angerer, Klaus-Peter Dieckmann, Christian Wülfing","doi":"10.1007/s00120-025-02678-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is an established treatment modality for nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT) and selected seminomas. The advent of minimally invasive techniques, particularly robot-assisted RPLND (R-RPLND), involves the prospects of reducing procedure-related morbidity while maintaining oncologic efficacy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We performed a narrative review comparing contemporary data on R‑RPLND and open RPLND (O-RPLND) across different clinical settings (primary, clinical stages I-II, and postchemotherapy). Guideline recommendations are reviewed regarding results from prospective and retrospective studies, as well as recent meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>R‑RPLND consistently demonstrated advantages in perioperative outcomes, including reduced blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and faster convalescence. High-grade complication rates (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) were comparable or lower than with O‑RPLND. Oncologic outcomes, including recurrence-free survival, were noninferior across all stages. In the postchemotherapy setting, R‑RPLND was associated with lower morbidity, though surgical feasibility is highly dependent on tumour size, location, and prior abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>R‑RPLND represents a safe and effective alternative to O‑RPLND in selected patients when performed in high-volume centres. Its perioperative advantages, coupled with equivalent short-term oncologic outcomes, render R‑RPLND an attractive option. However, high-quality randomised trials with long-term follow-up are required to confirm oncologic equivalence and to refine patient selection criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":29782,"journal":{"name":"Urologie","volume":" ","pages":"1046-1054"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-025-02678-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is an established treatment modality for nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT) and selected seminomas. The advent of minimally invasive techniques, particularly robot-assisted RPLND (R-RPLND), involves the prospects of reducing procedure-related morbidity while maintaining oncologic efficacy.

Materials and methods: We performed a narrative review comparing contemporary data on R‑RPLND and open RPLND (O-RPLND) across different clinical settings (primary, clinical stages I-II, and postchemotherapy). Guideline recommendations are reviewed regarding results from prospective and retrospective studies, as well as recent meta-analyses.

Results: R‑RPLND consistently demonstrated advantages in perioperative outcomes, including reduced blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and faster convalescence. High-grade complication rates (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) were comparable or lower than with O‑RPLND. Oncologic outcomes, including recurrence-free survival, were noninferior across all stages. In the postchemotherapy setting, R‑RPLND was associated with lower morbidity, though surgical feasibility is highly dependent on tumour size, location, and prior abdominal surgery.

Conclusion: R‑RPLND represents a safe and effective alternative to O‑RPLND in selected patients when performed in high-volume centres. Its perioperative advantages, coupled with equivalent short-term oncologic outcomes, render R‑RPLND an attractive option. However, high-quality randomised trials with long-term follow-up are required to confirm oncologic equivalence and to refine patient selection criteria.

腹膜后淋巴结切除术治疗睾丸生殖细胞肿瘤——机器人辅助技术是否优于开放手术方法?]
背景:腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(RPLND)是非精原细胞瘤性生殖细胞肿瘤(NSGCT)和精原细胞瘤的一种既定治疗方式。微创技术的出现,特别是机器人辅助RPLND (R-RPLND),涉及到在保持肿瘤疗效的同时降低手术相关发病率的前景。材料和方法:我们进行了一项叙述性综述,比较了不同临床背景(原发性、临床I-II期和化疗后)的R -RPLND和开放式RPLND (O-RPLND)的当代数据。根据前瞻性和回顾性研究的结果以及最近的荟萃分析,综述了指南建议。结果:R - RPLND在围手术期预后方面一贯表现出优势,包括减少失血量、缩短住院时间和加快康复速度。高级别并发症发生率(Clavien-Dindo ≥III)与O - RPLND相当或更低。肿瘤预后,包括无复发生存期,在所有阶段都不差。在化疗后的情况下,R - RPLND与较低的发病率相关,尽管手术的可行性高度依赖于肿瘤大小、位置和既往腹部手术。结论:R - RPLND是一种安全有效的替代O - RPLND的选择,当在大容量中心进行时。它的围手术期优势,加上相当的短期肿瘤预后,使R - RPLND成为一个有吸引力的选择。然而,需要长期随访的高质量随机试验来确认肿瘤等效性并完善患者选择标准。
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
Urologie
Urologie UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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