Top

Published in:

01-10-2014 | Urosurgery (A Stenzl, Section Editor)

How to Minimize Lymphoceles and Treat Clinically Symptomatic Lymphoceles After Radical Prostatectomy

Authors: Hak J. Lee, Christopher J. Kane

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 10/2014

Abstract

The development of a lymphocele after pelvic surgery is a well-documented complication, especially where pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is part of the operation. However, not all lymphoceles are symptomatic and require treatment. Most lymphoceles spontaneously resolve, and even lymphoceles that become symptomatic may resolve without any intervention. Robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a common operation in urology where PLND is likely to be performed in intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients. The rationale for performing a PLND in prostate cancer is for accurate staging and potential therapeutic benefits. However, due to potential intraoperative and postoperative complications there is still a debate regarding the value of PLND in prostate cancer. In this review, we will discuss the potential risk factors to be aware of in pelvic surgery in order to minimize the formation of a lymphocele, along with the management for clinically significant lymphoceles.

Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):431–52.PubMedCrossRef

2.•

Yuh B, Artibani W, Heidenreich A, et al. The Role of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in the Management of High-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol. May 18 2013. A systemic expert review of peri-operative outcomes of men with high risk prostate cancer after robotic assisted prostatectomy. There is significant variability in the template of the lymph node dissection, but overall extended lymph node dissection improved the staging and has a higher pelvic lymph node yield with minial post-operative lymphoceles.

3.••

Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications - a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):7–16. A literature review of the efficacy, limitations and complications of pelvic node dissection during roboticradical prostatectomy. Pelvic lymph node dissection only related complications are rare, but the most commoncomplication after lymph node dissection is lymphoceles that are subclinical. The overall types and rates ofrobotic complications are similar to open and laparoscopic prostatectomies.

Liss MA, Skarecky D, Morales B, Osann K, Eichel L, Ahlering TE. Preventing perioperative complications of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2013;81(2):319–23.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

5.••

Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR. Incidence of lymphoceles after robot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int. 2011;108(7):1185–90.Only study to prospectively follow patients with computed tomography 6-12 wks after the robotic assisted radical prostatectomy to determine the true post-operative lymphocele rates. PubMedCrossRef

Naselli A, Andreatta R, Introini C, Fontana V, Puppo P. Predictors of symptomatic lymphocele after lymph node excision and radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2010;75(3):630–5.PubMedCrossRef

Capitanio U, Pellucchi F, Gallina A, et al. How can we predict lymphorrhoea and clinically significant lymphocoeles after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy? Clinical implications. BJU Int. 2011;107(7):1095–101.PubMedCrossRef

Patel VR, Sivaraman A. Current status of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: progress is inevitable. Oncology (Williston Park, NY). 2012;26(7):616–9. 622.

Ayanian JZ, Van der Wees PJ. Tackling rising health care costs in Massachusetts. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(9):790–3.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63(1):11–30.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Abbou CC, Hoznek A, Salomon L, et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot. J Urol. 2001;165(6 Pt 1):1964–6.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Rassweiler J, Frede T, Seemann O, Stock C, Sentker L. Telesurgical laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Initial experience. Eur Urol. 2001;40(1):75–83.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Pasticier G, Rietbergen JB, Guillonneau B, Fromont G, Menon M, Vallancien G. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol. 2001;40(1):70–4.PubMedCrossRef

14.

H. Lavery DS, and A. Levinson Not a zero-sum game: the adoption of robotics has increased overall prostatectomy utilization in the united states. Proc Am Urol Assoc Annu Meet, Poster Session. 2011.

15.

Stitzenberg KB, Wong YN, Nielsen ME, Egleston BL, Uzzo RG. Trends in radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care. Cancer. 2012;118(1):54–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Musch M, Klevecka V, Roggenbuck U, Kroepfl D. Complications of pelvic lymphadenectomy in 1,380 patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy between 1993 and 2006. J Urol. 2008;179(3):923–8. discussion 928–929.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Solberg A, Angelsen A, Bergan U, Haugen OA, Viset T, Klepp O. Frequency of lymphoceles after open and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003;37(3):218–21.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Khoder WY, Trottmann M, Buchner A, et al. Risk factors for pelvic lymphoceles post-radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol Off J Jpn Urol Assoc. 2011;18(9):638–43.

19.

Liss MA, Palazzi K, Stroup SP, Jabaji R, Raheem OA, Kane CJ. Outcomes and complications of pelvic lymph node dissection during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. World J Urol. 2013;31(3):481–8.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Rabbani F, Yunis LH, Pinochet R, et al. Comprehensive standardized report of complications of retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;57(3):371–86.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Kowalczyk KJ, Levy JM, Caplan CF, et al. Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100 % Medicare sample. Eur Urol. 2012;61(4):803–9.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Briganti A, Bianchi M, Sun M, et al. Impact of the introduction of a robotic training programme on prostate cancer stage migration at a single tertiary referral centre. BJU Int. 2013;111(8):1222–30.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Zorn KC, Katz MH, Bernstein A, et al. Pelvic lymphadenectomy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Assessing nodal yield, perioperative outcomes, and complications. Urology. 2009;74(2):296–302.PubMedCrossRef

24.••

Cooperberg MR, Kane CJ, Cowan JE, Carroll PR. Adequacy of lymphadenectomy among men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2010;105(1):88–92.Retrospective data comparing rates of lymph node dissection and nodal yields for open radical prostatectomy vs. robotic assisted prostatectomy form a single institution. Demonstrated in a large contempory series that nodal yield was adeaquate for both approaches. PubMedCrossRef

25.

Silberstein JL, Vickers AJ, Power NE, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection for patients with elevated risk of lymph node invasion during radical prostatectomy: comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures. J Endourol. 2012;26(6):748–53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

26.

Katz DJ, Yee DS, Godoy G, Nogueira L, Chong KT, Coleman JA. Lymph node dissection during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparison of lymph node yield and clinical outcomes when including common iliac nodes with standard template dissection. BJU Int. 2010;106(3):391–6.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Polcari AJ, Hugen CM, Sivarajan G, et al. Comparison of open and robot-assisted pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer. J Endourol. 2009;23(8):1313–7.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Truesdale MD, Lee DJ, Cheetham PJ, Hruby GW, Turk AT, Badani KK. Assessment of lymph node yield after pelvic lymph node dissection in men with prostate cancer: a comparison between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy in the modern era. J Endourol. 2010;24(7):1055–60.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Association AU. Guideline for the managment of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 Update. 2007 Update.

30.

Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124–37.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Network NCC. NCCN guidelines in oncology Ver 1.2014 Prostate cancer http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf. 2014.

32.

Abdollah F, Sun M, Suardi N, et al. National Comprehensive Cancer Network practice guidelines 2011: Need for more accurate recommendations for pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. J Urol. 2012;188(2):423–8.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Mori N. Clinical and experimental studies on the so-called lymphocyst which develops after radical hysterectomy in cancer of the uterine cervix. J Jpn Obstet Gynecol Soc. 1955;2(2):178–203.PubMed

34.

Metcalf KS, Peel KR. Lymphocele. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1993;75(6):387–92.PubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Miller GJ, Howarth DJ, Attfield JC, et al. Haemostatic factors in human peripheral afferent lymph. Thromb Haemost. 2000;83(3):427–32.PubMed

36.

White M, Mueller PR, Ferrucci Jr JT, et al. Percutaneous drainage of postoperative abdominal and pelvic lymphoceles. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985;145(5):1065–9.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Lima ML, Cotrim CA, Moro JC, Miyaoka R, D'Ancona CA. Laparoscopic treatment of lymphoceles after renal transplantation. Int braz J Urol Off J Braz Soc Urol. 2012;38(2):215–21. discussion 221.CrossRef

38.•

Weingartner K, Ramaswamy A, Bittinger A, Gerharz EW, Voge D, Riedmiller H. Anatomical basis for pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: results of an autopsy study and implications for the clinic. J Urol. 1996;156(6):1969–71. Comparing cadaveric vs open prostatectomy patients with clinically organ confined prostate cancer to establish an accepted number, size and distribution of regional lymph nodes in prostate cancer compared to a normal prostate. PubMedCrossRef

39.•

Bochner BH, Cho D, Herr HW, Donat M, Kattan MW, Dalbagni G. Prospectively packaged lymph node dissections with radical cystectomy: evaluation of node count variability and node mapping. J Urol. 2004;172(4 Pt 1):1286–90. Extent of the lymph node dissection determined the lymph node yield. The type of lymh node dissection was associated with the overall node yield.

40.

Yuh BE, Ruel NH, Mejia R, Novara G, Wilson TG. Standardized comparison of robot-assisted limited and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112(1):81–8.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Lee JY, Diaz RR, Cho KS, et al. Lymphocele after extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matching study. Int J Urol Off J Jpn Urol Assoc. 2013;20(12):1169–76.

42.

Park SC, Lee JW, Park SA, Lee YH, So BJ, Rim JS. The deep vein thrombosis caused by lymphocele after endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. Can Urol Assoc J J de l’Assoc des Urol du Can. 2011;5(3):E40–3.

43.

Warncke SH, Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Z'Brun S, Krause T, Studer UE. Detection rate and operating time required for gamma probe-guided sentinel lymph node resection after injection of technetium-99 m nanocolloid into the prostate with and without preoperative imaging. Eur Urol. 2007;52(1):126–32.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, et al. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):118–25.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Weckermann D, Dorn R, Trefz M, Wagner T, Wawroschek F, Harzmann R. Sentinel lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: experience with more than 1,000 patients. J Urol. 2007;177(3):916–20.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Pagliarulo V, Hawes D, Brands FH, et al. Detection of occult lymph node metastases in locally advanced node-negative prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2735–42.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Ji J, Yuan H, Wang L, Hou J. Is the impact of the extent of lymphadenectomy in radical prostatectomy related to the disease risk? A single center prospective study. J Surg Res. 2012;178(2):779–84.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Clark T, Parekh DJ, Cookson MS, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of extended versus limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003;169(1):145–7. discussion 147–148.PubMedCrossRef

49.

Danuser H, Di Pierro GB, Stucki P, Mattei A. Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy and various radical prostatectomy techniques: is pelvic drainage necessary? BJU Int. 2013;111(6):963–9.PubMedCrossRef

50.

Stolzenburg JU, Wasserscheid J, Rabenalt R, et al. Reduction in incidence of lymphocele following extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection by bilateral peritoneal fenestration. World J Urol. 2008;26(6):581–6.PubMedCrossRef

51.

Beyer J, Wessela S, Hakenberg OW, et al. Incidence, risk profile and morphological pattern of venous thromboembolism after prostate cancer surgery. J Thromb Haemost JTH. 2009;7(4):597–604.CrossRef

52.

Lundin C, Bersztel A, Wahlberg J, Wadstrom J. Low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis increases the incidence of lymphocele after kidney transplantation. Ups J Med Sci. 2002;107(1):9–15.PubMedCrossRef

53.

Gotto GT, Yunis LH, Guillonneau B, et al. Predictors of symptomatic lymphocele after radical prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection. Int J Urol Off J Jpn Urol Assoc. Feb 10 2011.

54.

Bigg SW, Catalona WJ. Prophylactic mini-dose heparin in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. A prospective trial. Urology. 1992;39(4):309–13.PubMedCrossRef

55.

Tomic R, Granfors T, Sjodin JG, Ohberg L. Lymph leakage after staging pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostatic carcinoma with and without heparin prophylaxis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1994;28(3):273–5.PubMed

56.

Kropfl D, Krause R, Hartung R, Pfeiffer R, Behrendt H. Subcutaneous heparin injection in the upper arm as a method of avoiding lymphoceles after lymphadenectomies in the lower part of the body. Urol Int. 1987;42(6):416–23.PubMedCrossRef

57.

Sieber PR, Rommel FM, Agusta VE, et al. Is heparin contraindicated in pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical prostatectomy? J Urol. 1997;158(3 Pt 1):869–71.PubMedCrossRef

58.

Chalmers DJ, Scarpato KR, Staff I, et al. Does heparin prophylaxis reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing robot-assisted prostatectomy? J Endourol. 2013;27(6):800–3.PubMedCrossRef

59.

Koch Jr MO, JAS. Low molecular weight heparin and radical prostatectomy: a prospective analysis of safety and side effects. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 1997;1(2):101.PubMedCrossRef

60.•

Hu JC, Gold KF, Pashos CL, Mehta SS, Litwin MS. Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(3):401–5. Evaluating the role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes from National Medicare beneficiary database. Surgeon volume is inversely related to in-hospital complications and hospital length of stay after radical prostatectomy. PubMedCrossRef

61.

Hu JC, Gold KF, Pashos CL, Mehta SS, Litwin MS. Temporal trends in radical prostatectomy complications from 1991 to 1998. J Urol. 2003;169(4):1443–8.PubMedCrossRef

62.

Davis JW, Kreaden US, Gabbert J, Thomas R. Learning Curve Assessment of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Compared with Open-Surgery Controls from the Premier Perspective Database. J Endourol. Feb 6 2014.

63.

Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, et al. Superior Quality of Life and Improved Surgical Margins Are Achievable with Robotic Radical Prostatectomy After a Long Learning Curve: A Prospective Single-surgeon Study of 1552 Consecutive Cases. Eur Urol. 2014;65(3):521–31.PubMedCrossRef

64.

Ghazi A, Scosyrev E, Patel H, Messing EM, Joseph JV. Complications associated with extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using the standardized Martin classification. Urology. 2013;81(2):324–31.PubMedCrossRef

65.

Sharma S, Kim HL, Mohler JL. Routine pelvic drainage not required after open or robotic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2007;69(2):330–3.PubMedCrossRef

66.

Araki M, Manoharan M, Vyas S, Nieder AM, Soloway MS. A pelvic drain can often be avoided after radical retropubic prostatectomy–an update in 552 cases. Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1241–7. discussion 1246–1247.PubMedCrossRef

67.

Savoie M, Soloway MS, Kim SS, Manoharan M. A pelvic drain may be avoided after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;170(1):112–4.PubMedCrossRef

68.

Box GN, Lee HJ, Abraham JB, et al. Comparative study of in vivo lymphatic sealing capability of the porcine thoracic duct using laparoscopic dissection devices. J Urol. 2009;181(1):387–91.PubMedCrossRef

69.

Simonato A, Varca V, Esposito M, Venzano F, Carmignani G. The use of a surgical patch in the prevention of lymphoceles after extraperitoneal pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer: a randomized prospective pilot study. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2285–90.PubMedCrossRef

70.

Scholz HS, Petru E, Benedicic C, Haas J, Tamussino K, Winter R. Fibrin application for preventing lymphocysts after retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in patients with gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;84(1):43–6.PubMedCrossRef

71.

Furrer M, Inderbitzi R, Nachbur B. Does administration of fibrin glue prevent development of lymphoceles after radical lymphadenectomy? Der Chirurg Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen. 1993;64(12):1044–9.PubMed

72.

Waldert M, Remzi M, Klatte T, Klingler HC. FloSeal reduces the incidence of lymphoceles after lymphadenectomies in laparoscopic and robot-assisted extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2011;25(6):969–73.PubMedCrossRef

73.

Gilliland JD, Spies JB, Brown SB, Yrizarry JM, Greenwood LH. Lymphoceles: percutaneous treatment with povidone-iodine sclerosis. Radiology. 1989;171(1):227–9.PubMedCrossRef

74.

Kim JK, Jeong YY, Kim YH, Kim YC, Kang HK, Choi HS. Postoperative pelvic lymphocele: treatment with simple percutaneous catheter drainage. Radiology. 1999;212(2):390–4.PubMedCrossRef

75.

Akhan O, Karcaaltincaba M, Ozmen MN, Akinci D, Karcaaltincaba D, Ayhan A. Percutaneous transcatheter ethanol sclerotherapy and catheter drainage of postoperative pelvic lymphoceles. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30(2):237–40.PubMedCrossRef

76.

Kerlan Jr RK, LaBerge JM, Gordon RL, Ring EJ. Bleomycin sclerosis of pelvic lymphoceles. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 1997;8(5):885–7.CrossRef

77.

Caliendo MV, Lee DE, Queiroz R, Waldman DL. Sclerotherapy with use of doxycycline after percutaneous drainage of postoperative lymphoceles. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 2001;12(1):73–7.CrossRef

78.

Alago Jr W, Deodhar A, Michell H, et al. Management of postoperative lymphoceles after lymphadenectomy: percutaneous catheter drainage with and without povidone-iodine sclerotherapy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36(2):466–71.PubMedCrossRef

79.

Chin A, Ragavendra N, Hilborne L, Gritsch HA. Fibrin sealant sclerotherapy for treatment of lymphoceles following renal transplantation. J Urol. 2003;170(2 Pt 1):380–3.PubMedCrossRef

80.

Raheem OA, Bazzi WM, Parsons JK, Kane CJ. Management of pelvic lymphoceles following robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Ann. 2012;4(2):111–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

81.

Khoder WY, Becker AJ, Seitz M, Haseke N, Schlenker B, Stief CG. Modified laparoscopic lymphocele marsupialization for the treatment of lymphoceles after radical prostatectomy: first results. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2011;21(2):145–8.PubMedCrossRef

82.

Treiyer A, Haben B, Stark E, Breitling P, Steffens J. Uni- vs. multiloculated pelvic lymphoceles: differences in the treatment of symptomatic pelvic lymphoceles after open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol Off J Braz Soc Urol. 2009;35(2):164–9. discussion 170.CrossRef

Title: How to Minimize Lymphoceles and Treat Clinically Symptomatic Lymphoceles After Radical Prostatectomy
Authors: Hak J. Lee
Christopher J. Kane
Publication date: 01-10-2014
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Current Urology Reports / Issue 10/2014
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-014-0445-y

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

How to Minimize Lymphoceles and Treat Clinically Symptomatic Lymphoceles After Radical Prostatectomy

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2014

Optimizing Urology Group Partnerships: Collaboration Strategies and Compensation Best Practices

Vesicoureteral Reflux: Current Management in Children

The Evaluation and Management of Refractory Neurogenic Overactive Bladder

Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: Is there Evidence to go Beyond the Experimental Stage?

Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Women with Diabetes Mellitus: A Current Review

Impact of Alpha Blockers, 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors and Combination Therapy on Sexual Function