Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical and Anatomic Considerations of Malignancies Affecting the Groin: Consideration for Melanoma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Malignancies of the Groin

  • 657 Accesses

Abstract

For the approach to melanoma affecting the groin, most melanoma surgeons will consider actually two anatomic areas. The first is the superficial groin, also called inguinal groin dissection, consisting of the femoral and inguinal lymph nodes. The second being the deep groin also called an iliac or external iliac dissection, consisting of the external iliac and obturator lymph nodes. For purpose of clarity, in the remaining part of this chapter on melanoma, these will be referred to as superficial groin dissection (SGD), deep groin dissection (DGD), and a combined superficial and deep groin dissection (CGD). A combined groin dissection is sometimes also referred to as an ilioinguinal dissection. Another word for dissection is lymphadenectomy. While these techniques are described elsewhere in this text, it is appropriate to review them to help place the remainder of the discussion in context. The details which follow reflect the approach of this author and there is variation among experts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Balch CM, Gershenwald JE, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6199–206.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Veronesi U, Adamus J, Bandiera DC, et al. Inefficacy of immediate node dissection in stage 1 melanoma of the limbs. N Engl J Med. 1977;297:627–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sim FH, Taylor WF, Ivins JC, et al. A prospective randomized study of the efficacy of routine elective lymphadenectomy in management of malignant melanoma. Preliminary results. Cancer. 1978;41:948–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Balch CM, Soong SJ, Bartolucci AA, et al. Efficacy of an elective regional lymph node dissection of 1 to 4 mm thick melanomas for patients 60 years of age and younger. Ann Surg. 1996;224:255–63. discussion 263–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cascinelli N, Morabito A, Santinami M, et al. Immediate or delayed dissection of regional nodes in patients with melanoma of the trunk: a randomised trial. WHO melanoma programme. Lancet. 1998;351:793–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127:392–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, et al. Multi-institutional melanoma lymphatic mapping experience: the prognostic value of sentinel lymph node status in 612 stage I or II melanoma patients. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:976–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van der Ploeg AP, van Akkooi AC, Schmitz PI, et al. EORTC melanoma group sentinel node protocol identifies high rate of submicrometastases according to Rotterdam criteria. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2414–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. van Akkooi AC, Atkins MB, Agarwala SS, et al. Surgical management and adjuvant therapy for high-risk and metastatic melanoma. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2016;35:e505–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy or nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1307–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Final trial report of sentinel-node biopsy versus nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:599–609.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Thomas JM. Prognostic false-positivity of the sentinel node in melanoma. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5:18–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Torjesen I. Sentinel node biopsy for melanoma: unnecessary treatment? BMJ. 2013;346:e8645.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Akkooi AC. Sentinel node followed by completion lymph node dissection versus nodal observation: staging or therapeutic? Controversy continues despite final results of MSLT-1. Melanoma Res. 2014;24:291–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Altstein L, Li G. Latent subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial through a semiparametric accelerated failure time mixture model. Biometrics. 2013;69:52–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Altstein LL, Li G, Elashoff RM. A method to estimate treatment efficacy among latent subgroups of a randomized clinical trial. Stat Med. 2011;30:709–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Scolyer RA, Murali R, McCarthy SW, et al. Pathologic examination of sentinel lymph nodes from melanoma patients. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2008;25:100–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. van Akkooi AC, Eggermont AM. SLNB in melanoma—DFS a true and cost-effective benefit? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014;11:PMID:25311352.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:711–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:23–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Postow MA, Chesney J, Pavlick AC, et al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2006–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schadendorf D, Hodi FS, Robert C, et al. Pooled analysis of long-term survival data from phase II and phase III trials of ipilimumab in unresectable or metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1889–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Wolchok JD, Kluger H, Callahan MK, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:122–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2507–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Flaherty KT, Infante JR, Daud A, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1694–703.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Flaherty KT, Robert C, Hersey P, et al. Improved survival with MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:107–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hauschild A, Grob JJ, Demidov LV, et al. Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;380:358–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Long GV, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1877–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Robert C, Karaszewska B, Schachter J, et al. Improved overall survival in melanoma with combined dabrafenib and trametinib. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:30–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, et al. Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:320–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ribas A, Puzanov I, Dummer R, et al. Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:908–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Robert C, Ribas A, Wolchok JD, et al. Anti-programmed-death-receptor-1 treatment with pembrolizumab in ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma: a randomised dose-comparison cohort of a phase 1 trial. Lancet. 2014;384:1109–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, et al. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2521–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:522–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1845–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Morton DL. Overview and update of the phase III multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trials (MSLT-I and MSLT-II) in melanoma. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2012;29:699–706.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Leiter U, Stadler R, Mauch C, et al. Complete lymph node dissection versus no dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node biopsy positive melanoma (DeCOG-SLT): a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:757–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Starz H, Balda BR, Kramer KU, et al. A micromorphometry-based concept for routine classification of sentinel lymph node metastases and its clinical relevance for patients with melanoma. Cancer. 2001;91:2110–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ranieri JM, Wagner JD, Azuaje R, et al. Prognostic importance of lymph node tumor burden in melanoma patients staged by sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:975–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Carlson GW, Murray DR, Lyles RH, et al. The amount of metastatic melanoma in a sentinel lymph node: does it have prognostic significance? Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:575–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Reeves ME, Delgado R, Busam KJ, et al. Prediction of nonsentinel lymph node status in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:27–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Starz H, Siedlecki K, Balda BR. Sentinel lymphonodectomy and s-classification: a successful strategy for better prediction and improvement of outcome of melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:162S–8S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cochran AJ, Wen DR, Huang RR, et al. Prediction of metastatic melanoma in nonsentinel nodes and clinical outcome based on the primary melanoma and the sentinel node. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:747–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Dewar DJ, Newell B, Green MA, et al. The microanatomic location of metastatic melanoma in sentinel lymph nodes predicts nonsentinel lymph node involvement. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3345–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Vuylsteke RJ, Borgstein PJ, van Leeuwen PA, et al. Sentinel lymph node tumor load: an independent predictor of additional lymph node involvement and survival in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:440–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pearlman NW, McCarter MD, Frank M, et al. Size of sentinel node metastases predicts other nodal disease and survival in malignant melanoma. Am J Surg. 2006;192:878–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. van Akkooi AC, de Wilt JH, Verhoef C, et al. Clinical relevance of melanoma micrometastases (<0.1 mm) in sentinel nodes: are these nodes to be considered negative? Ann Oncol. 2006;17:1578–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Govindarajan A, Ghazarian DM, McCready DR, et al. Histological features of melanoma sentinel lymph node metastases associated with status of the completion lymphadenectomy and rate of subsequent relapse. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:906–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Satzger I, Volker B, Al Ghazal M, et al. Prognostic significance of histopathological parameters in sentinel nodes of melanoma patients. Histopathology. 2007;50:764–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Scheri RP, Essner R, Turner RR, et al. Isolated tumor cells in the sentinel node affect long-term prognosis of patients with melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2861–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Debarbieux S, Duru G, Dalle S, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma: a micromorphometric study relating to prognosis and completion lymph node dissection. Br J Dermatol. 2007;157:58–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Guggenheim M, Dummer R, Jung FJ, et al. The influence of sentinel lymph node tumour burden on additional lymph node involvement and disease-free survival in cutaneous melanoma—a retrospective analysis of 392 cases. Br J Cancer. 2008;98:1922–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Roka F, Mastan P, Binder M, et al. Prediction of non-sentinel node status and outcome in sentinel node-positive melanoma patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34:82–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Satzger I, Volker B, Meier A, et al. Criteria in sentinel lymph nodes of melanoma patients that predict involvement of nonsentinel lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1723–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Frankel TL, Griffith KA, Lowe L, et al. Do micromorphometric features of metastatic deposits within sentinel nodes predict nonsentinel lymph node involvement in melanoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:2403–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. van Akkooi AC, Nowecki ZI, Voit C, et al. Sentinel node tumor burden according to the Rotterdam criteria is the most important prognostic factor for survival in melanoma patients: a multicenter study in 388 patients with positive sentinel nodes. Ann Surg. 2008;248:949–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Gershenwald JE, Andtbacka RH, Prieto VG, et al. Microscopic tumor burden in sentinel lymph nodes predicts synchronous nonsentinel lymph node involvement in patients with melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4296–303.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. van der Ploeg IM, Kroon BB, Antonini N, et al. Comparison of three micromorphometric pathology classifications of melanoma metastases in the sentinel node. Ann Surg. 2009;250:301–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. van der Ploeg IM, Kroon BB, Antonini N, et al. Is completion lymph node dissection needed in case of minimal melanoma metastasis in the sentinel node? Ann Surg. 2009;249:1003–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Riber-Hansen R, Nyengaard JR, Hamilton-Dutoit SJ, et al. Metastatic melanoma volume in sentinel nodes: objective stereology-based measurement predicts disease recurrence and survival. Histopathology. 2009;54:796–803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Riber-Hansen R, Nyengaard JR, Hamilton-Dutoit SJ, et al. Automated digital volume measurement of melanoma metastases in sentinel nodes predicts disease recurrence and survival. Histopathology. 2011;59:433–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Francischetto T, Spector N, Neto Rezende JF, et al. Influence of sentinel lymph node tumor burden on survival in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1152–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Younan R, Bougrine A, Watters K, et al. Validation study of the s classification for melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes: the Montreal experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1414–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Cadili A, McKinnon G, Wright F, et al. Validation of a scoring system to predict non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in melanoma. J Surg Oncol. 2010;101:191–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Cadili A, Scolyer RA, Brown PT, et al. Total sentinel lymph node tumor size predicts nonsentinel node metastasis and survival in patients with melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3015–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Meier A, Satzger I, Volker B, et al. Comparison of classification systems in melanoma sentinel lymph nodes--an analysis of 697 patients from a single center. Cancer. 2010;116:3178–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. van der Ploeg AP, van Akkooi AC, Haydu LE, et al. The prognostic significance of sentinel node tumour burden in melanoma patients: an international, multicenter study of 1539 sentinel node-positive melanoma patients. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:111–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. van der Ploeg AP, van Akkooi AC, Rutkowski P, et al. Prognosis in patients with sentinel node-positive melanoma is accurately defined by the combined Rotterdam tumor load and Dewar topography criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2206–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Fink AM, Weihsengruber F, Duschek N, et al. Value of micromorphometric criteria of sentinel lymph node metastases in predicting further nonsentinel lymph node metastases in patients with melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2011;21:139–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Murali R, Desilva C, Thompson JF, et al. Factors predicting recurrence and survival in sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma patients. Ann Surg. 2011;253:1155–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Egger ME, Bower MR, Czyszczon IA, et al. Comparison of sentinel lymph node micrometastatic tumor burden measurements in melanoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218:519–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kim C, Economou S, Amatruda TT, et al. Prognostic significance of microscopic tumor burden in sentinel lymph node in patients with cutaneous melanoma. Anticancer Res. 2015;35:301–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Namikawa K, Yamazaki N, Nakai Y, et al. Prediction of additional lymph node positivity and clinical outcome of micrometastases in sentinel lymph nodes in cutaneous melanoma: a multi-institutional study of 450 patients in Japan. J Dermatol. 2012;39:130–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Murali R, Cochran AJ, Cook MG, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histologic parameters of melanoma deposits in sentinel lymph nodes: implications for management of patients with melanoma. Cancer. 2009;115:5026–37.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Hughes TM, Thomas JM. Combined inguinal and pelvic lymph node dissection for stage III melanoma. Br J Surg. 1999;86:1493–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Badgwell B, Xing Y, Gershenwald JE, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection is beneficial in subsets of patients with node-positive melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2867–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. van der Ploeg AP, van Akkooi AC, Schmitz PI, et al. Therapeutic surgical management of palpable melanoma groin metastases: superficial or combined superficial and deep groin lymph node dissection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3300–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Allan CP, Hayes AJ, Thomas JM. Ilioinguinal lymph node dissection for palpable metastatic melanoma to the groin. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:982–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Oude Ophuis CM, van Akkooi AC, Hoekstra HJ, et al. Risk factors for positive deep pelvic nodal involvement in patients with palpable groin melanoma metastases: can the extent of surgery be safely minimized? A retrospective, multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(Suppl 3):S1172–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Soderman M, Thomsen JB, Sorensen JA. Complications following inguinal and ilioinguinal lymphadenectomies: a meta-analysis. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2016;50:315–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Stuiver MM, Westerduin E, ter Meulen S, et al. Surgical wound complications after groin dissection in melanoma patients – a historical cohort study and risk factor analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:1284–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. van Akkooi AC, Bouwhuis MG, van Geel AN, et al. Morbidity and prognosis after therapeutic lymph node dissections for malignant melanoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:102–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Henderson MA, Burmeister BH, Ainslie J, 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;16:1049–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Bartlett EK, Meise C, Bansal N, et al. Sartorius transposition during inguinal lymphadenectomy for melanoma. J Surg Res. 2013;184:209–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Weldrick C, Bashar K, O'Sullivan TA, et al. A comparison of fibrin sealant versus standard closure in the reduction of postoperative morbidity after groin dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:1391–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Faut M, Heidema RM, Hoekstra HJ, et al. Morbidity after inguinal lymph node dissections: it is time for a change. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:330–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Sommariva A, Pasquali S, Rossi CR. Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for lymph node metastasis from solid tumors. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41:274–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Sanchez A, Sotelo R, Rodriguez O, et al. Robot-assisted video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for melanoma. J Robot Surg. 2016;10:369–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Alexander C. J. van Akkooi M.D., Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Alexander C. J. van Akkooi M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander C. J. van Akkooi M.D., Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Keith A. Delman

  2. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

    Viraj A. Master

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Akkooi, A.C.J. (2018). Surgical and Anatomic Considerations of Malignancies Affecting the Groin: Consideration for Melanoma. In: Delman, K., Master, V. (eds) Malignancies of the Groin. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60858-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60858-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60857-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60858-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation