Role of Lymphadenectomy in Surgical Treatment of Solid Tumors: An Update on the Clinical Data
- 28 June 2007
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Annals of Surgical Oncology
- Vol. 14 (9) , 2443-2462
- https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9360-5
Abstract
The role of lymphadenectomy as an adjunct of standard excision for treatment of cancer is highly debated and controversial. Standard practice for treatment of solid tumors is resection with regional lymphadenectomy. This surgical concept assumes that cancers grow and spread in an orderly manner, from primary cancer to regional lymph nodes and finally to vital organs. We reviewed randomized trials, published a description of lymphatic anatomy and physiology, and presented data that disputed the role of lymphadenectomy as standard practice. The present review updates the literature and reiterates the concept that lymphadenectomy does not increase survival in the surgical treatment of solid tumors. We reviewed the English-language literature (Medline) for prospective randomized trials and nonrandomized reports, as well as retrospective studies addressing the role of lymphadenectomy in cancers of the esophagus, lung, stomach, pancreas, breast, and skin (melanoma) reported between 2000 and 2006. This extensive review demonstrates that there are few prospective randomized trials assessing patient survival with solid tumors that contrast resection with or without lymphadenectomy. However, there was at least one, and for some cancers more than one, prospective randomized trial for each organ site studied, and the data demonstrate no statistically significant difference in overall survival of patients treated with or without lymphadenectomy. Most nonrandomized and retrospective studies, with a few exceptions, support the conclusions of randomized trials; lymphadenectomy does not improve overall survival in solid tumors. Overall survival is primarily a function of the biological nature of the primary tumor, as evidenced by lymphovascular invasion, lymph node involvement, and other prognostic features. This extensive literature review of recent reports indicates that lymphadenectomy does not improve overall survival. Lymph node resection should be conceived in terms of staging, prognosis, and regional control only.Keywords
This publication has 97 references indexed in Scilit:
- Clinical outcomes of extended esophagectomy with three-field lymph node dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinomaThe American Journal of Surgery, 2005
- Three-Field Lymphadenectomy for Carcinoma of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction in 174 R0 Resections: Impact on Staging, Disease-Free Survival, and OutcomeAnnals of Surgery, 2004
- Improved Survival for Patients With Upper and/or Middle Mediastinal Lymph Node Metastasis of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Lower Thoracic Esophagus Treated With 3-Field DissectionAnnals of Surgery, 2004
- Recurrence pattern of squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus after extended radical esophagectomy with three-field lymphadenectomyJournal of the American College of Surgeons, 2004
- Extended Esophagectomy With 3-Field Lymph Node Dissection for Esophageal CancerArchives of Surgery, 2003
- Optimal Lymphadenectomy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Thoracic Esophagus: Comparing the Short‐ and Long‐term Outcome among the Four Types of LymphadenectomyWorld Journal of Surgery, 2003
- Extended Transthoracic Resection Compared with Limited Transhiatal Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the EsophagusNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Three-Field Lymph Node Dissection for Squamous Cell and Adenocarcinoma of the EsophagusAnnals of Surgery, 2002
- BIOLOGIC AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF LYMPHADENECTOMYSurgical Clinics of North America, 2000
- THE RESULTS OF RADICAL OPERATIONS FOR THE CURE OF CARCINOMA OF THE BREAST.*Annals of Surgery, 1907