University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Department of Urology, Milan, Italy.
Eur Urol. 2011 Dec;60(6):1212-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.09.003. Epub 2011 Sep 13.
Although lymphadenectomy (lymph node dissection [LND]) is currently accepted as the most accurate and reliable staging procedure for the detection of lymph node invasion (LNI), its therapeutic benefit in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) still remains controversial.
Review the available literature concerning the role of LND in RCC staging and outcome.
A Medline search was conducted to identify original articles, review articles, and editorials addressing the role of LND in RCC. Keywords included kidney neoplasms, renal cell cancer, renal cell carcinoma, kidney cancer, lymphadenectomy, lymph node excision, lymphatic metastases, nephrectomy, imaging, and complications. The articles with the highest level of evidence were identified with the consensus of all of the collaborative authors and were critically reviewed. This review is the result of an interactive peer-reviewing process by an expert panel of co-authors.
Renal lymphatic drainage is unpredictable. The newer available imaging techniques are still immature in detecting small lymph node metastases. Results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 30881 showed no benefit in performing LND during surgery for clinically node-negative RCC, but the results are limited to patients with the lowest risk of developing LNI. Numerous retrospective series support the hypothesis that LND may be beneficial in high-risk patients (clinical T3-T4, high Fuhrman grade, presence of sarcomatoid features, or coagulative tumor necrosis). If enlarged nodes are evident at imaging or palpable during surgery, LND seems justified at any stage. However, the extent of the LND remains a matter of controversy.
To date, the available evidence suggests that an extended LND may be beneficial when technically feasible in patients with locally advanced disease (T3-T4) and/or unfavorable clinical and pathologic characteristics (high Fuhrman grade, larger tumors, presence of sarcomatoid features, and/or coagulative tumor necrosis). Although node-positive patients often harbor distant metastases as well, the majority of retrospective nonrandomized trials seem to suggest a possible benefit of regional LND even for this group of patients. In patients with T1-T2, clinically negative lymph nodes and absence of unfavorable clinical and pathologic characteristics, regional LND offers limited staging information and no benefit in terms of decreasing disease recurrence or improving survival.
尽管淋巴结切除术(淋巴结清扫术 [LND])目前被认为是检测淋巴结侵犯(LNI)最准确和可靠的分期程序,但它在肾细胞癌(RCC)中的治疗益处仍存在争议。
回顾有关 LND 在 RCC 分期和结局中的作用的现有文献。
进行了 Medline 搜索,以确定涉及 LND 在 RCC 中的作用的原始文章、综述文章和社论。关键词包括肾肿瘤、肾细胞癌、肾癌、淋巴结切除术、淋巴结切除、淋巴转移、肾切除术、影像学和并发症。通过所有合作作者的共识确定了具有最高证据水平的文章,并对其进行了批判性审查。本综述是专家小组合著作者互动同行评审过程的结果。
肾淋巴引流是不可预测的。较新的可用成像技术在检测小淋巴结转移方面仍不成熟。欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织试验 30881 的结果表明,在临床淋巴结阴性 RCC 手术中进行 LND 没有益处,但结果仅限于发生 LNI 风险最低的患者。许多回顾性系列支持这样的假设,即 LND 可能对高危患者(临床 T3-T4、高 Fuhrman 分级、存在肉瘤样特征或凝固性肿瘤坏死)有益。如果影像学上可见增大的淋巴结或术中可触及,LND 在任何阶段似乎都是合理的。然而,LND 的范围仍然存在争议。
迄今为止,现有证据表明,在技术上可行的情况下,在局部进展性疾病(T3-T4)和/或不利的临床和病理特征(高 Fuhrman 分级、较大的肿瘤、存在肉瘤样特征和/或凝固性肿瘤坏死)的患者中,广泛的 LND 可能有益。尽管阳性淋巴结的患者通常也有远处转移,但大多数回顾性非随机试验似乎表明,即使对于这组患者,区域 LND 也可能有获益。对于 T1-T2、临床阴性淋巴结且无不利临床和病理特征的患者,区域 LND 提供的分期信息有限,并且不能降低疾病复发率或提高生存率。