4.4 Article

The Contemporary Role of Lymph Node Dissection During Nephroureterectomy in the Management of Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: The Canadian Experience

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 79, Issue 4, Pages 840-845

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.11.058

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To investigate the association between lymph node dissection (LND) and survival among patients undergoing nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC). METHODS This study includes 1029 patients from 10 Canadian institutions who underwent nephroureterectomy between 1990 and 2010. Disease-specific survival (DSS), overall survival (OS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared for patients with a node-negative LND (N0), node-positive LND (N+), or no LND (Nx) using Kaplan-Meyer analysis and Cox regression analysis. The association between survival and number of positive nodes, number of nodes removed, and ratio of positive nodes to nodes removed was also investigated. RESULTS The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 19.8 months (interquartile range = 7.2-53.8). LND was performed in 276 (26.8%) patients, and 77 (27.9%) had N+ disease. Patients with N+ disease had significantly shorter OS, DSS, and RFS compared with N0 and Nx patients(P < .01). No differences were identified between N0 and Nx patients in any survival categories (P > .05). A ratio of positive nodes to nodes removed >= 20% had a per annum hazard ratio of 2.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-4.65) for OS, 2.70 (95% CI = 1.25-5.83) for DSS, and 1.94 (95% CI = 1.13-3.32) for RFS. The number of positive nodes and the number of nodes removed were not associated with survival in any survival category (P > .05). CONCLUSION LND during nephroureterectomy provides more accurate staging and prediction of survival; however, it remains uncertain whether LND independently improves survival in patients with UTUC. UROLOGY 79: 840-845, 2012. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available