4.6 Review

Current perspectives of sentinel lymph node dissection at the time of radical surgery for prostate cancer

期刊

CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS
卷 50, 期 -, 页码 228-239

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2016.09.020

关键词

Prostatic neoplasms; Sentinel lymph node biopsy; Lymph node excision; Lymphoscintigraphy; Radioactive tracers; Indocyanine green; Fluorescence

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) concept relies on the accurate detection of primary nodal landing sites and could represent a major advancement towards accurate, non-invasive pelvic staging in prostate cancer (PCa). Different iterations of the technique have now been validated and reproduced mostly in large-volume centres. The existing evidence denotes the feasibility and sensitivity of SLND, with encouraging pre- and intraoperative detection rates of 98% and 96%. Yet, current surgical practice mandates a backup template dissection due to a false negative rate, up to 7.1%, of tracer-guided surgery. In practice, SLND failed to achieve nodal detection in up to 20% of pelvic sidewalls. Despite scarce validated evidence, current consensus mainly attributes these false negative cases to altered prostatic drainage secondary to malignant obliteration of lymphovascular structures. In parallel, multiple SLND studies have highlighted the complex and variable drainage pathways from the prostate, furthering the established anatomical atlases. The most promising approach may therefore rely in magnetic nanoparticles and PCa-targeting ligands. However, in the absence of a clear sentinel node or region for the prostate, formal SLND is difficult to integrate in routine surgical practice for now. As such, tracer-guided dissection is only used as a complementary intervention to highlight first- echelon nodes and aberrant lymphatic pathways found beyond the commonly adopted pelvic lymphadenectomy templates. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据