• Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
  • Hormone Therapy
  • Genomic Testing
  • Next-Generation Imaging
  • UTUC
  • OAB and Incontinence
  • Genitourinary Cancers
  • Kidney Cancer
  • Men's Health
  • Pediatrics
  • Female Urology
  • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Kidney Stones
  • Urologic Surgery
  • Bladder Cancer
  • Benign Conditions
  • Prostate Cancer

Prostate cancer: What is the optimal lymphadenectomy?


Adequate lymphadenectomy is critical to the evaluation and staging of patients with many types of malignancies, including prostate cancer.

Key Points

This article discusses the current data concerning indications for lymphadenectomy in men with prostate cancer, the appropriate number of nodes to retrieve, and the optimal extent of dissection. We also examine the questions of whether extended node dissection provides therapeutic benefit and whether node dissection is equivalent for traditional open prostatectomy and robot-assisted prostatectomy.

Most series advocate omitting lymphadenectomy in patients who are low risk (ie, PSA ≤10.0 ng/mL, who have a Gleason score ≤6, and who have clinical stage cT1c and T2a disease. It is important to remember, however, that even patients who are low risk by this definition may carry up to a 3% chance of harboring positive lymph nodes.

How many nodes are enough?

Using data from a large community-based cohort of patients in the United States, Kawakami et al found that the mean number of nodes retrieved during limited template lymphadenectomy is 5.7 (J Urol 2006; 176:1382-6). In contrast, on the basis of cadaver studies, Weingartner et al determined that the minimum acceptable number of nodes for a complete pelvic lymphadenectomy is 20 (J Urol 2001; 166:2295-6). Reasons for the disparity in number of nodes retrieved include differences in the extent of the template and differences in specimen processing. For example, Wawroschek et al found that sending lymph node packets by region, rather than en bloc, significantly increased the number of nodes identified (Eur Urol 2003; 43:132-6). Differences in pathologic examination and identification of nodes may also explain some of the variability in number of nodes reported (J Urol 2006; 176:1382-6).

Related Videos
Blur image of hospital corridor | Image Credit: © whyframeshot - stock.adobe.com
doctor showing a patient some information on a digital tablet | Image Credit: © bongkarn - stock.adobe.com
A panel of 4 experts on prostate cancer
A panel of experts on prostate cancer
A panel of 4 experts on prostate cancer
Blurred interior of hospital | Image Credit: © jakkapan - stock.adobe.com
A panel of 4 experts on prostate cancer
Related Content
© 2024 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.