Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Springer, World Journal of Urology, 6(39), p. 1969-1976, 2020

DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03437-z

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Clinical outcome of robot-assisted residual mass resection in metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumor

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the outcome of robot-assisted residual mass resection (RA-RMR) in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT) patients with residual tumor following chemotherapy. Patients and methods Retrospective medical chart analysis of all patients with NSGCT undergoing RA-RMR at two tertiary referral centers between January 2007 and April 2019. Patients were considered for RA-RMR in case of a residual tumor between 10 and 50 mm at cross-sectional computed tomography (CT) imaging located ventrally or laterally from the aorta or vena cava, with normalized tumor markers following completion of chemotherapy, and no history of retroperitoneal surgery. Results A total of 45 patients were included in the analysis. The Royal Marsden stage before chemotherapy was IIA in 13 (28.9%), IIB in 16 (35.6%), IIC in 3 (6.7%) and IV in 13 patients (28.9%). The median residual tumor size was 1.9 cm (interquartile range [IQR] 1.4–2.8; range 1.0–5.0). Five procedures (11.1%) were converted to an open procedure due to a vascular injury (n = 2), technical difficulty (n = 2) or tumor debris leakage (n = 1). A postoperative adverse event occurred in two patients (4.4%). Histopathology showed teratoma, necrosis and viable cancer in 29 (64.4%), 14 (31.1%), and two patients (4.4%), respectively. After a median follow-up of 41 months (IQR 22–70), one patient (2.2%) relapsed in the retroperitoneum. The one- and 2-year recurrence-free survival rate was 98%. Conclusion RA-RMR is an appropriate treatment option in selected patients, potentially providing excellent cure rates with minimal morbidity. Long-term outcome data are needed to further support this strategy and determine inclusion and exclusion criteria.