Distribution of Lymph Node Metastasis Sites in Endometrial Cancer Undergoing Systematic Pelvic and Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy: A Proposal of Optimal Lymphadenectomy for Future Clinical Trials
- 484 Downloads
The aim of this study was to demonstrate the precise mapping of lymph node metastasis (LNM) sites in endometrial cancer.
A total of 266 patients who underwent primary radical surgery including systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer from 1993 to 2010 were enrolled in this study. We removed lymph nodes from the femoral ring to the para-aortic node up to the level of renal veins. We analyzed the distribution of positive-node sites according to their anatomical location.
Overall, 42 of 266 patients (15.8 %) showed LNM. The median number of nodes harvested was 62.5 (range 40–119) in pelvic nodes (PLN), and 20 (range 3–47) in para-aortic nodes (PAN). Among 42 cases with positive-nodes, 16 cases (38.1 %) showed positive PLN alone, 7 cases (16.7 %) in PAN alone, and 19 cases (45.2 %) in both PLN and PAN. The most prevalent site of positive-nodes was PAN (9.8 %) followed by obturator nodes (9.4 %), internal iliac nodes (7.1 %), and common iliac nodes (5.6 %). Six of 19 cases (31.6 %) of positive PAN above the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) showed negative PAN below IMA. Metastasis to the deep inguinal nodes was found to be extremely rare (0.38 %). Single-site LNM was the most frequently observed in obturator nodes, followed by PAN above IMA.
Routine resection of deep inguinal nodes is not recommended, whereas para-aortic lymphadenectomy should be extended up to the level of renal veins for endometrial cancer.
KeywordsLymph Node Metastatis Sentinel Node Endometrial Cancer Renal Vein Inferior Mesenteric Artery
We declare no conflict of interest for this study.
- 2.Greer B, Koh W, Abu-Rustum NR, et al. Uterine neoplasms. Version 2. 2012. Fort Washington: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2011. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_glPDF/uterine.pdf. Accessed 24 Dec 2011.
- 3.Nagase S, Katabuchi H, Hiura M, et al; Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Evidence-based guidelines for treatment of uterine body neoplasm in Japan: Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology (JSGO) 2009 edition. Int J Clin Oncol. 2010;15:531–42.Google Scholar
- 12.Fotopoulou C, Savvatis K, Kraetschell R, Schefold JC, Lichtenegger W, Sehouli J. Systematic pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy in intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer: lymph-node mapping and identification of predictive factors for lymph-node status. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;149:199–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F, et al. Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs no lymphadenectomy in early stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1707–16.Google Scholar