Video Section

International Braz J Urol
Official Journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology

Vol. 39 (6): 893-894, November - December, 2013
 
Expanded criteria for Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) in penile cancer: palpable lymph nodes
     
Alexandre Stievano Carlos, Pedro Romanelli, Ricardo Nishimoto, Luis M. Montoya, Cesar Augusto Braz Juliano, Renato Meirelles M. da Costa Jr, Antonio C. L. Pompeo, Marcos Tobias-Machado
ABC Medical School (ASC, CABJ, RMMCJr, ACLP, MTM), Santo André; Alberto Cavalcanti Hospital (PR, RN), Belo Horizonte and National Institute of Neoplastic Diseases (LMM), Lima, Peru
   
Abstract
Introduction: Open inguinal lymphadenectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of inguinal metastasis in patients with penile cancer (PC). Recently the Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) was proposed as an option to reduce the morbidity of the procedure in patients without palpable inguinal lymph nodes (PILN), however the oncological equivalency in patients with PILN remains poorly studied. The aims of this video are the demonstration of VEIL in patients with PILN and present the preliminary experience comparing patients with and without PILN. Materials and Methods: The video illustrates the procedure performed in two cases that were previously underwent partial penectomy for PC with PILN. Data from the series of 15 patients (22 limbs operated) with PILN underwent VEIL were compared with our series of VEIL in 25 clinically N0 patients (35 limbs operated). Results: The comparison between the groups with and without PILN found, respectively, these outcomes: age 52,45 x 53,2 years, operative time 126,8 x 95,5 minutes, hospital stay 5. x 3.1 days, drainage time 6.7 x 5.7 days, 9 resected lymph nodes on average in both groups, global complications 32% x 26%, cellulitis 4.5% x 0%, lymphocele 23% in both groups, skin necrosis 0% x 3%, myocutaneous necrosis 4.5% x 0%, pN+ 33% x 32%, cancer specific mortality 7% x 5% and mean follow-up 17.3 x 35.3 months. None of the variables presented p < 0.05. Conclusions: VEIL is a safe complementary procedure for treatment of PC, even in patients with PILN. Oncological results in patients with PILN seem to be appropriate but are still very premature. Prospective multicenter studies with larger samples and long-term follow-up should be conducted to determine the oncological equivalence of VEIL compared with open surgery in patients with PILN.
 

Key Words:
Int Braz J Urol. 2012; 39 (Video #14): 893-4

DOI: