TY - JOUR
T1 - The impact of drainage pathways on the detection of nodal metastases in prostate cancer
T2 - a phase II randomized comparison of intratumoral vs intraprostatic tracer injection for sentinel node detection
AU - Wit, Esther M K
AU - van Beurden, Florian
AU - Kleinjan, Gijs H
AU - Grivas, Nikolaos
AU - de Korne, Clarize M
AU - Buckle, Tessa
AU - Donswijk, Maarten L
AU - Bekers, Elise M
AU - van Leeuwen, Fijs W B
AU - van der Poel, Henk G
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - INTRODUCTION: Previous studies indicated that location and amount of detected sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in prostate cancer (PCa) are influenced where SLN-tracer is deposited within the prostate. To validate whether intratumoral (IT) tracer injection helps to increase identification of tumor-positive lymph nodes (LNs) better than intraprostatic (IP) tracer injection, a prospective randomized phase II trial was performed.METHODS: PCa patients with a > 5% risk of lymphatic involvement were randomized between ultrasound-guided transrectal injection of indocyanine green-[99mTc]Tc-nanocolloid in 2 depots of 1 mL in the tumor (n = 55, IT-group) or in 4 depots of 0.5 mL in the peripheral zone of the prostate (n = 58, IP-group). Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and SPECT/CT were used to define the location of the SLNs. SLNs were dissected using combination of radio- and fluorescence-guidance, followed by extended pelvic LN dissection and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Outcome measurements were number of tumor-bearing SNs, tumor-bearing LNs, removed nodes, number of patients with nodal metastases, and metastasis-free survival (MFS) of 4-7-year follow-up data.RESULTS: IT-injection did not result in significant difference of removed SLNs (5.0 vs 6.0, p = 0.317) and histologically positive SLNs (28 vs 22, p = 0.571). However, in IT-group, the SLN-positive nodes were 73.7% of total positive nodes compared to 37.3% in IP-group (p = 0.015). Moreover, significantly more node-positive patients were found in IT-group (42% vs 24%, p = 0.045), which did not result in worse MFS. In two patients (3.6%) from whom the IT-tracer injection only partly covered intraprostatic tumor spread, nodal metastases in ePLND without tumor-positive SNs were yielded.CONCLUSIONS: The percentage-positive SLNs found after IT-injection were significantly higher compared to IP-injection. Significantly more node-positive patients were found using IT-injection, which did not affect MFS. IT-injection failed to detect nodal metastases from non-index satellite lesions. Therefore, we suggest to combine IT- and IP-tracer injections in men with visible tumor on imaging.
AB - INTRODUCTION: Previous studies indicated that location and amount of detected sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in prostate cancer (PCa) are influenced where SLN-tracer is deposited within the prostate. To validate whether intratumoral (IT) tracer injection helps to increase identification of tumor-positive lymph nodes (LNs) better than intraprostatic (IP) tracer injection, a prospective randomized phase II trial was performed.METHODS: PCa patients with a > 5% risk of lymphatic involvement were randomized between ultrasound-guided transrectal injection of indocyanine green-[99mTc]Tc-nanocolloid in 2 depots of 1 mL in the tumor (n = 55, IT-group) or in 4 depots of 0.5 mL in the peripheral zone of the prostate (n = 58, IP-group). Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and SPECT/CT were used to define the location of the SLNs. SLNs were dissected using combination of radio- and fluorescence-guidance, followed by extended pelvic LN dissection and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Outcome measurements were number of tumor-bearing SNs, tumor-bearing LNs, removed nodes, number of patients with nodal metastases, and metastasis-free survival (MFS) of 4-7-year follow-up data.RESULTS: IT-injection did not result in significant difference of removed SLNs (5.0 vs 6.0, p = 0.317) and histologically positive SLNs (28 vs 22, p = 0.571). However, in IT-group, the SLN-positive nodes were 73.7% of total positive nodes compared to 37.3% in IP-group (p = 0.015). Moreover, significantly more node-positive patients were found in IT-group (42% vs 24%, p = 0.045), which did not result in worse MFS. In two patients (3.6%) from whom the IT-tracer injection only partly covered intraprostatic tumor spread, nodal metastases in ePLND without tumor-positive SNs were yielded.CONCLUSIONS: The percentage-positive SLNs found after IT-injection were significantly higher compared to IP-injection. Significantly more node-positive patients were found using IT-injection, which did not affect MFS. IT-injection failed to detect nodal metastases from non-index satellite lesions. Therefore, we suggest to combine IT- and IP-tracer injections in men with visible tumor on imaging.
KW - Drainage
KW - Humans
KW - Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging
KW - Male
KW - Prospective Studies
KW - Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology
KW - Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy/methods
KW - Sentinel Lymph Node/pathology
U2 - 10.1007/s00259-021-05580-0
DO - 10.1007/s00259-021-05580-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 34748059
SN - 1619-7070
VL - 49
SP - 1743
EP - 1753
JO - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
JF - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
IS - 5
ER -