The problem of lymphadenectomy: Pro

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer is controversial even if part of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging. FIGO guidelines recommend pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Despite these recommendations, controversy continues to exist regarding the recommended extent of lymph node dissection, as well as its utility in improving survival for endometrial cancer. Recently two randomized clinical studies favored the "no-lymphadenectomy" arm. However a lot of criticisms have been raised, starting from the thoroughness of lymphadenectomy. Moreover, the introduction of the sentinel node technique brought other issues to the debate. Sentinel node detection will compete with emerging technologies such as MRI, PET-TC, and Molecular Markers in the identification of subset of patients eligible for lymph node dissection. Whether or not a complete (pelvic and aortic) lymphadenectomy is superior to the evolving technique of sentinel node is under debate. Up to date no definitive conclusions could be driven. Lymphadenectomy is not indicated in low-risk / negative nodes endometrial cancer. Lymphadenectomy seems to show therapeutic effects only in high-risk / positive nodes patients and could be used to tailor adjuvant therapies.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationEndometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment
PublisherNova Science Publishers, Inc.
Pages119-130
Number of pages12
ISBN (Print)9781622577408
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2013

Fingerprint

Gynecology
Lymph Node Excision
Obstetrics
Dissection
Endometrial Neoplasms
Magnetic resonance imaging
cyhalothrin
Therapeutic Uses
Guidelines
Technology
Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Raspagliesi, F., Ditto, A., & Martinelli, F. (2013). The problem of lymphadenectomy: Pro. In Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment (pp. 119-130). Nova Science Publishers, Inc..

The problem of lymphadenectomy : Pro. / Raspagliesi, Francesco; Ditto, Antonino; Martinelli, Fabio.

Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2013. p. 119-130.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Raspagliesi, F, Ditto, A & Martinelli, F 2013, The problem of lymphadenectomy: Pro. in Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., pp. 119-130.
Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Martinelli F. The problem of lymphadenectomy: Pro. In Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment. Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2013. p. 119-130
Raspagliesi, Francesco ; Ditto, Antonino ; Martinelli, Fabio. / The problem of lymphadenectomy : Pro. Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2013. pp. 119-130
@inbook{e39e3b60e8844583bfbef0db7431f03f,
title = "The problem of lymphadenectomy: Pro",
abstract = "The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer is controversial even if part of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging. FIGO guidelines recommend pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Despite these recommendations, controversy continues to exist regarding the recommended extent of lymph node dissection, as well as its utility in improving survival for endometrial cancer. Recently two randomized clinical studies favored the {"}no-lymphadenectomy{"} arm. However a lot of criticisms have been raised, starting from the thoroughness of lymphadenectomy. Moreover, the introduction of the sentinel node technique brought other issues to the debate. Sentinel node detection will compete with emerging technologies such as MRI, PET-TC, and Molecular Markers in the identification of subset of patients eligible for lymph node dissection. Whether or not a complete (pelvic and aortic) lymphadenectomy is superior to the evolving technique of sentinel node is under debate. Up to date no definitive conclusions could be driven. Lymphadenectomy is not indicated in low-risk / negative nodes endometrial cancer. Lymphadenectomy seems to show therapeutic effects only in high-risk / positive nodes patients and could be used to tailor adjuvant therapies.",
author = "Francesco Raspagliesi and Antonino Ditto and Fabio Martinelli",
year = "2013",
month = "2",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781622577408",
pages = "119--130",
booktitle = "Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment",
publisher = "Nova Science Publishers, Inc.",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - The problem of lymphadenectomy

T2 - Pro

AU - Raspagliesi, Francesco

AU - Ditto, Antonino

AU - Martinelli, Fabio

PY - 2013/2

Y1 - 2013/2

N2 - The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer is controversial even if part of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging. FIGO guidelines recommend pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Despite these recommendations, controversy continues to exist regarding the recommended extent of lymph node dissection, as well as its utility in improving survival for endometrial cancer. Recently two randomized clinical studies favored the "no-lymphadenectomy" arm. However a lot of criticisms have been raised, starting from the thoroughness of lymphadenectomy. Moreover, the introduction of the sentinel node technique brought other issues to the debate. Sentinel node detection will compete with emerging technologies such as MRI, PET-TC, and Molecular Markers in the identification of subset of patients eligible for lymph node dissection. Whether or not a complete (pelvic and aortic) lymphadenectomy is superior to the evolving technique of sentinel node is under debate. Up to date no definitive conclusions could be driven. Lymphadenectomy is not indicated in low-risk / negative nodes endometrial cancer. Lymphadenectomy seems to show therapeutic effects only in high-risk / positive nodes patients and could be used to tailor adjuvant therapies.

AB - The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer is controversial even if part of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging. FIGO guidelines recommend pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. Despite these recommendations, controversy continues to exist regarding the recommended extent of lymph node dissection, as well as its utility in improving survival for endometrial cancer. Recently two randomized clinical studies favored the "no-lymphadenectomy" arm. However a lot of criticisms have been raised, starting from the thoroughness of lymphadenectomy. Moreover, the introduction of the sentinel node technique brought other issues to the debate. Sentinel node detection will compete with emerging technologies such as MRI, PET-TC, and Molecular Markers in the identification of subset of patients eligible for lymph node dissection. Whether or not a complete (pelvic and aortic) lymphadenectomy is superior to the evolving technique of sentinel node is under debate. Up to date no definitive conclusions could be driven. Lymphadenectomy is not indicated in low-risk / negative nodes endometrial cancer. Lymphadenectomy seems to show therapeutic effects only in high-risk / positive nodes patients and could be used to tailor adjuvant therapies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84895401966&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84895401966&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84895401966

SN - 9781622577408

SP - 119

EP - 130

BT - Endometrial Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment

PB - Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

ER -