Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 297, Issue 5, pp 1277–1283 | Cite as

Endoscopy-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer

  • Aiwen Le
  • Jie Xiong
  • Zhonghai Wang
  • Xiao yun Dai
  • Tian hui Xiao
  • Rong Zhuo
  • Ya hong Xu
  • Rui Yuan
Gynecologic Oncology



To explore the feasibility and efficiency of video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) for vulvar cancer.


We evaluated 46 patients with vulvar cancer. Treatment included VEIL using the hypogastric subcutaneous approach (VEIL-H, 17 patients), VEIL with the limb subcutaneous surgical approach (VEIL-L, 8 patients), and open inguinal lymphadenectomy (OIL, 21 patients). All patients underwent radical vulvectomy; we evaluated operative time, the amount of bleeding, SF score, recurrence rate, etc.


The durations of VEIL-H and VEIL-L were 170.79 ± 18.92 and 180.12 ± 17.88 min, respectively, which were longer than that of OIL (100.68 ± 11.37 min; P = 0.028). Bleeding volumes in the VEIL-H and VEIL-L groups were 15.23 ± 2.17 and 17.16 ± 2.35 ml, respectively; there were significantly lower than that of the OIL group (36.68 ± 3.48 ml; P = 0.021). The numbers of unilateral lymph nodes harvested were similar in all groups. The duration of hospitalization in VEIL group was shorter than that of the OIL group. There were less skin and lymphatic complications after VEIL than after OIL. Total SF-36 scores were significantly higher in the VEIL group than that in the OIL group (P = 0.032). There were no statistically significant differences in local recurrence, distant metastasis, and mortality among the three groups.


VEIL for vulvar cancer treatment is effective, with the advantages of short hospitalization stay, less bleeding, and reduced postoperative complications comparing the OIL.


Vulvar cancer Inguinal lymphadenectomy Laparoscopy 


Author contributions

AL: project development, data collection, and manuscript writing. JX: data collection. ZW: data collection; data analysis. XD: data collection. TX: data collection. RZ: data collection. YX: data collection. RY: project development and manuscript editing.


This study was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong (Grant no. 2016A030313033).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A (2014) Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 64(1):9–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dellinger TH, Hakim AA, Lee SJ, Wakabayashi MT, Morgan RJ, Han ES (2017) Surgical management of vulvar cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 15(1):121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koh WJ, Greer BE, Abu-Rustum NR et al (2017) Vulvar cancer, version 1.2017. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in OncologyGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaban A, Kaban I, Afşar S (2017) Surgical management of squamous cell vulvar cancer without clitoris, urethra or anus involvement. Gynecol Oncol Rep 10(20):41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim HS, Lee M (2017) Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) for vulvar cancer. Gynecol Oncol 144(1):225–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yamamoto T, Matsuda N, Todokoro T et al (2011) Lower extremity lymphedema index. A simple method for severity evaluation of lower extremity lymphedema. Ann Plast Surg 67(6):637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zullo F, Palomba S, Russo T et al (2005) A prospective randomized comparison between laparoscopic and laparotomic approaches in women with early stage endometrial cancer: a focus on the quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(4):1344–1352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naldini A, Rossitto C, Morciano A et al (2014) The first leg video endoscopic groin lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer: a case report. Int J Surg 5(8):455–458Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van der Avoort IA, Shirango H, Hoevenaars BM et al (2006) Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma is a multifactorial disease following two separate and independent pathways. Int J Gynecol Pathol 25:22–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Butler JS, Milliken DA, Dina R et al (2010) Isolated groin recurrence in vulval squamous cell cancer (VSCC). The importance of node count. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 31(5):510–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Beekhuizen HJ, Auzin M, van den Einden LC et al (2014) Lymph node count at inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy and groin recurrences in vulvar cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24(4):773–778CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baiocchi G, Cestari FM, Rocha RM et al (2013) Does the count after inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer correlate with outcome? Eur J Surg Oncol 39(4):339–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang H, Li L, Yao D, Li F, Zhang J, Yang Z (2015) Preliminary experience of performing a video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy using a hypogastric subcutaneous approach in patients with vulvar cancer. Oncol Lett 9(2):752–756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pahwa HS, Misra S, Kumar A, Kumar V, Agarwal A, Srivastava R (2013) Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL): a prospective critical perioperative assessment of feasibility and morbidity with points of technique in penile carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol 11(1):42–47CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baiocchi G, Silva Cestari FM, Rocha RM et al (2013) Prognostic value of the number and laterality of metastatic inguinal lymph nodes in vulvar cancer: revisiting the FIGO staging system. Eur J Surg Oncol 39(7):780–785CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Diehl A, Volland R, Kirn V et al (2016) The number of removed lymph nodes by inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy: impact on recurrence rates in patients with vulva carcinoma. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294(1):131–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rouzier R, Haddad B, Plantier F, Dubois P, Pelisse M, Paniel BJ (2002) Local relapse in patients treated for squamous cell vulvar carcinoma: incidence and prognostic value. Obstet Gynecol 100(6):1159–1167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Coulter J, Gleeson N (2003) Local and regional recurrence of vulval cancer: management dilemmas. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 17(4):663–681CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gadducci A, Cionini L, Romanini A, Fanucchi A, Genazzani AR (2006) Old and new perspectives in the management of high-risk, locally advanced or recurrent, and metastatic vulvar cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 60(3):227–241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu C, Lu Y, Yao D (2015) Feasibility and safety of video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy in vulvar cancer: a systematic review. PLoS One 10(10):e0140873CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hacker NF, Berek JS, Lagasse LD, Nieberg RK (1983) Microinvasive carcinoma of the vulva. Obstet Gynecol 62(1):134–135PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyThe Nanshan Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen UniversityShenzhenChina
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations