Inguinal and Ilio-inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Management of Palpable Melanoma Lymph Node Metastasis: A Long-Term Prospective Evaluation of Morbidity and Quality of Life
Prospective data are lacking on long-term morbidity of inguinal lymphadenectomy including the influence of extent of surgery, use of radiotherapy, and patient factors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of these factors on patient outcome, quality of life (QOL), regional symptoms, and limb volumes after inguinal or ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy for melanoma.
Analysis of the subgroup of patients with inguinal lymph node field relapse of melanoma, treated by inguinal or ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy in the ANZMTG/TROG randomized trial of adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation.
Sixty-nine patients, 46 having undergone inguinal and 23 ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy, with median follow-up of 73 months were analyzed. Mean limb volume increased rapidly after surgery (7% by 3 months) and continued to increase for at least another 18 months. Patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2 had greater limb volume increase than normal-weight patients (13.3% versus 6.9%, P = 0.030). QOL improved over the first 18 months, but despite initial improvement, regional symptoms persisted long term. Type of surgery (inguinal or ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy) had no demonstrably significant effect on limb volume (9.9% versus 13.4%, P = 0.35), QOL (P = 0.68), or regional symptoms (P = 0.65). There was no difference in overall survival between inguinal and ilio-inguinal lymphadenectomy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40–1.40, P = 0.43].
Inguinal lymphadenectomy for melanoma is a potentially morbid procedure with significant increases in limb volume. Patients report reasonable QOL but may have ongoing regional symptoms. Overweight/obesity is associated with poorer QOL, increased limb volume, and regional symptoms.
This study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Cancer Australia, Melanoma Institute Australia, Cancer Council of South Australia.
No author has any financial interest in the subject of study.
- 7.Henderson MA, Burmeister BH, Ainslie J, Fisher R, Di Iulio J, Smithers BM, et al. Adjuvant lymph-node field radiotherapy versus observation only in patients with melanoma at high risk of further lymph-node field relapse after lymphadenectomy (ANZMTG 01.02/TROG 02.01): 6-year follow-up of a phase 3, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(9):1049–60.Google Scholar
- 9.Burmeister BH, Henderson MA, Ainslie J, Fisher R, Di Iulio J, Smithers BM, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation alone for patients at risk of lymph-node field relapse after therapeutic lymphadenectomy for melanoma: a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(6):589–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V 2. http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/ctcv20_4-30-992.pdf. Accessed 25 Feb 2019.
- 13.R Core Team. R Version 3.5.1: A language and environment for statistical computing.Google Scholar
- 18.Hyngstrom JR, Chiang Y-J, Cromwell KD, Ross MI, Xing Y, Mungovan KS, et al. Prospective assessment of lymphedema incidence and lymphedema-associated symptoms following lymph node surgery for melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2013;23(4):290–7.Google Scholar
- 21.Ul-Mulk J, Holmich LR. Lymph node dissection in patients with malignant melanoma is associated with high risk of morbidity. Dan Med J. 2012;59(6):A4441.Google Scholar
- 27.Testori A, Soteldo J, Powell B, Sales F, Borgognoni L, Rutkowski P, et al. Surgical management of melanoma: an EORTC Melanoma Group survey. Ecancermedicalscience. 2013;7:294.Google Scholar